People v. Hernandez CA4/2 ( 2023 )


Menu:
  • Filed 7/5/23 P. v. Hernandez 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    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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,                                      E080585
    v.                                                                      (Super.Ct.No. RIF1606142)
    CHRISTOPHER RAY HERNANDEZ,                                              OPINION
    Defendant and Appellant.
    APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Jeffrey Prevost, Judge.
    (Retired Judge of the Riverside Super. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art.
    VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.) Dismissed.
    David P. Lampkin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
    Appellant.
    No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
    1
    INTRODUCTION
    Defendant Christopher Ray Hernandez appeals the trial court’s denial of his
    petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1170.95.1 Counsel filed a brief
    raising no arguable issues under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 
    14 Cal.5th 216
     (Delgadillo).
    On April 3, 2023, we notified defendant: (1) counsel filed a brief indicating no
    arguable issues had been identified; (2) as a case arising from an order denying
    postconviction relief, this court was not required to conduct an independent review of the
    record, but we could do so in our discretion; and (3) in accordance with the procedures
    set forth in Delgadillo, he had 30 days in which to file a supplemental brief raising any
    argument he wanted this court to consider. We also notified defendant that if we did not
    receive a brief within that 30-day period, we may dismiss the appeal as abandoned. More
    than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from defendant.
    We consider defendant’s appeal abandoned and order the appeal dismissed.
    (Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 232.)
    1  Penal Code section 1170.95 was renumbered as section 1172.6 without change
    in the text, effective June 30, 2022 (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10).
    2
    DISPOSITION
    The appeal is dismissed.
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
    FIELDS
    J.
    We concur:
    CODRINGTON
    Acting P. J.
    RAPHAEL
    J.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: E080585

Filed Date: 7/5/2023

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 7/5/2023