People v. Vue CA3

Filed 5/4/23 P. v. Vue CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Sacramento)
----
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent, C097093
v. (Super. Ct. No. 05F10435)
BEE VUE,
Defendant and Appellant.
Defendant Bee Vue appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for resentencing
under Penal Code section 1172.6.1 Counsel filed a brief raising no arguable issues under
People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo) and requesting we exercise our
discretion to review the entire record for arguable issues on appeal.
1 Defendant filed his petition under Penal Code former section 1170.95. Effective
June 30, 2022, the Legislature renumbered Penal Code former section 1170.95 to
section 1172.6. (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10.)
1
On February 15, 2023, we notified defendant: 1) counsel had filed a brief
indicating no arguable issues had been identified; 2) as a case arising from an order
denying postconviction relief, defendant was not entitled to counsel or to an independent
review of the record; and 3) in accordance with the procedures set forth in Delgadillo,
defendant had 30 days in which to file a supplemental brief or letter raising any argument
he wanted this court to consider. In addition, we notified defendant if we did not receive
a letter or brief within that 30-day period, the court may dismiss the appeal as abandoned.
More than 30 days elapsed and we received no communication from defendant.
We consider defendant’s appeal abandoned and order the appeal dismissed.
(Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 232.)
DISPOSITION
The appeal is dismissed.
/S/
MAURO, J.
We concur:
/S/
ROBIE, Acting P. J.
/S/
RENNER, J.
2