People v. Lopez CA2/1 ( 2021 )


Menu:
  • Filed 4/26/21 P. v. Lopez CA2/1
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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    has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
    SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
    DIVISION ONE
    THE PEOPLE,                                                   B308988
    Plaintiff and Respondent,                           (Los Angeles County
    Super. Ct. No. PA054272)
    v.
    MICHAEL SANTILLAN
    LOPEZ,
    Defendant and Appellant.
    APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of
    Los Angeles County, David W. Stuart, Judge. Dismissed.
    Jennifer Peabody, under appointment by the Court of
    Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
    No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
    ____________________________
    PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
    “Defendant [Michael Santillan Lopez] went to trial on
    charges of willful, deliberate and premeditated attempted murder
    of a peace officer (§§ 664 & 187, subd. (a)),1 assault on a peace
    officer with a semi-automatic firearm (§ 245, subd. (d)(2)),
    evading a peace officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)), possession
    of a firearm by a felon (§ 12021, subd. (a)(1)), carrying a loaded
    firearm (§ 12031, subd. (a)(1)), and possession of ammunition
    (§ 12316, subd. (b)(1)).2 The following gang and weapon
    enhancements were also alleged: as to counts one through three,
    defendant personally and intentionally discharged a firearm
    (§ 12022.53, subd. (c)), and a principal personally used a firearm
    (§ 12022.53, subds. (b) [&] (e)(1)); as to count three, defendant
    personally used a firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (b) [&] § 12022.5,
    subds. (a) [&] (d)); as to count seven, defendant was an active
    participant in a street gang (§ 12031, subd. (a)(2)(C)); and as to
    counts one through eight, the offenses were committed for the
    benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with a criminal
    street gang with the specific intent to promote, further or assist
    in criminal conduct by gang members (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(A)
    [counts four through eight] and (C) [counts one through three]).
    It was also alleged that defendant suffered prior convictions of
    serious or violent felonies or juvenile adjudications. (§ 1170.12,
    1“Unless otherwise noted, all section references are to the
    Penal Code.”
    2 “Edward Alcala was charged in the information as a
    co-defendant. He plead[ed] guilty before trial . . . .”
    2
    subds. (a)–(d); § 667, subds. (b)–(i); § 667, subd. (b).)”3 (People v.
    Lopez (Aug. 17, 2009, B209515) [nonpub. opn.].)
    On June 11, 2008, the jury found defendant guilty on all
    charges and found all allegations true. On July 9, 2008, the trial
    court sentenced defendant to a total of 114 years to life in state
    prison. On August 17, 2009, we affirmed the judgment.
    On October 16, 2020, Lopez filed a “Motion For Modification
    Of Sentence Pursuant to Senate Bill 1393,” requesting that the
    trial court strike his prior serious or violent felony enhancements
    pursuant to Senate Bill No. 1393 (2017–2018 Reg. Sess.)
    (Stats. 2018, ch. 1013, § 2), which became effective on
    January 1, 2019. Senate Bill No. 1393 amended sections 667 and
    1385 to give trial courts discretion to strike these enhancements
    “in furtherance of justice.” (§ 1385, subd. (a).) In support of his
    motion, Lopez referenced his participation in “Victims Impact
    Groups” and participation in educational and restorative justice
    programs that “have given me insight into the life-style I was
    living at the time of my crime, and through these groups I have
    been able to truly learn what it is to hold oneself accountable and
    feel remorse.” Lopez attached to his motion certificates showing
    his participation in Criminal and Gangs Anonymous; completion
    of high school equivalency tests, a sewing machine operator
    apprenticeship, associate certified electronics technician
    customer service educational courses, and training in hand tools;
    and participation in anger management, victim impact, and
    stress management programs.
    3 We have taken this description of the charges against
    Lopez from our opinion in Lopez’s prior appeal.
    3
    On October 20, 2020, the trial court denied Lopez’s motion
    because “Defendant’s conviction became final in 2009 after his
    petition for review to the California Supreme Court was denied
    (case no. S176636), long before the effective date of the SB 1393
    in 2019.” The trial court reasoned that the amendments to
    section 1385 enacted by Senate Bill No. 1393 do not apply
    retroactively to final cases. Lopez filed a timely notice of appeal.
    We appointed counsel, who filed a brief identifying no issue
    and invited this court independently to review the entire record
    for arguable issues. This court notified Lopez that he had
    30 days to file a supplemental brief. Lopez did not file a
    supplemental brief. We thus have no independent duty to review
    the record for arguable issues. (People v. Cole (2020)
    
    52 Cal.App.5th 1023
    , 1034, review granted Oct. 14, 2020,
    S264278 [“[W]e reject the notion that the Constitution compels
    the adoption or extension of [People v. Wende (1979) 
    25 Cal.3d 436
    ] procedures (or any subset of them) for appeals other than a
    criminal defendant’s first appeal of right because, beyond that
    appeal, there is no right to the effective assistance of counsel.”].)
    We thus dismiss this appeal as abandoned. (Cole, at pp. 1023–
    1024, review granted.)
    4
    DISPOSITION
    The appeal is dismissed.
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.
    BENDIX, Acting P. J.
    We concur:
    CHANEY, J.
    FEDERMAN, J.*
    * Judge of the San Luis Obispo County Superior Court,
    assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of
    the California Constitution.
    5
    

Document Info

Docket Number: B308988

Filed Date: 4/26/2021

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/26/2021