Court Opinion

ID: 9948836
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-08 00:02:41.014832+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:26:05.684035
License: Public Domain

Filed 3/7/24 P. v. Sandovaldelgadillo CA4/2
                      NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
 California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for
publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication
                                     or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

           IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

                                   FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

                                                 DIVISION TWO

 THE PEOPLE,

          Plaintiff and Respondent,                                      E081598

 v.                                                                      (Super.Ct.No. RIF1503243)

 JAIME SANDOVALDELGADILLO,                                               OPINION

          Defendant and Appellant.

         APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. John D. Molloy, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.

         Ava R. Stralla, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and

Appellant.

         No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

                                                             1
       Defendant Jaime Sandovaldelgadillo appeals from an order of the Riverside

County Superior Court summarily denying his Penal Code section 1172.6 petition for

resentencing.1 We will dismiss.

                                    BACKGROUND2
       A jury found defendant guilty of first degree attempted murder and found true that

he had personally used a knife and personally inflicted great bodily injury. The trial court

sentenced him to seven years to life, plus consecutive terms for personal knife use (one

year), infliction of great bodily injury (three years), and a prison prior (one year).3 We

affirmed the judgment in Delgadillo I., supra, E067189.

       In August 2022, defendant filed a petition for resentencing pursuant to section

1172.6. The trial court set a status conference hearing and appointed counsel for

defendant. Counsel submitted briefs, arguing defendant’s petition was facially sufficient.

       At the hearing, counsel argued defendant did not harbor the requisite malice to

support an attempted murder conviction, and then submitted on the briefs he had filed.

1      Defendant’s petition was filed pursuant to section 1170.95. That provision was
renumbered as section 1172.6 without change in the text, effective June 30, 2022 (Stats.
2022, ch. 58, § 10). For the sake of simplicity, we refer to the provision by its new
numbering. All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

2     Some facts recited in this section are taken from this court’s opinion issued in
defendant’s appeal from the judgment, People v. Delgadillo (July 25, 2017, E067189)
[nonpub. opn.] (Delgadillo I.). We take judicial notice of that opinion on our own
motion. (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (d).)

3      The sentence for the prison prior was later stricken pursuant to section 1171.1,
which declared enhancements for prison priors invalid (excepting only those relating to
certain sexually violent offenses).

                                              2
The trial court stated it had reviewed defendant’s briefs and the court’s files, including all

of the jury instructions and portions of the reporter’s trial transcripts. It found the

instructions and arguments made during trial “refute what the defendant has said in his

petition, which is that he could not have been found guilty under the laws that exist

today.”4 Defendant timely noticed this appeal.

                                       DISCUSSION

       Defendant’s counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Delgadillo

(2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 that does not raise any issues. The brief includes a request for this

court to exercise its discretion to independently review the record for the reasons

articulated in People v. Griffin (2022) 85 Cal.App.5th 329, 335-336.

       We granted defendant’s request for judicial notice of portions of the reporter’s trial

transcripts and the jury instructions referred to by the trial court at the prima facie hearing

on defendant’s section 1172.6 petition.

       Upon receipt of counsel’s opening brief, we advised defendant that, because his

appeal is from the denial of a postconviction petition, this court is not required to conduct

an independent review of the record, and cited Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th 216. We

4        To prevail on a section 1172.6 petition, persons such as defendant who were
convicted of attempted first-degree murder must establish all of the following: (1) that an
accusatory pleading was filed against them that allows them to be prosecuted for
attempted murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine; (2) that they
were convicted of attempted murder following a trial, or accepted a plea offer in lieu of a
trial at which they could have been convicted of attempted murder, and (3) that they
could not presently be convicted of attempted murder because of changes to section 188
or 189 made effective January 1, 2019. (§ 1172.6, subd. (a)(1)-(3).)

                                               3
invited defendant to file any supplemental brief deemed necessary and advised him that

failure to do so might result in dismissal of the appeal as abandoned. Defendant did not

file a brief.

        Neither defendant nor his counsel have presented an issue and upon our review of

the record, we do not find any error. Accordingly, we dismiss defendant’s appeal.

                                     DISPOSITION

        The appeal is dismissed.

        NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

                                                              RAMIREZ
                                                                                     P. J.

We concur:

McKINSTER
                          J.
MILLER
                          J.

                                            4