People v. Nolasco CA3

Filed 6/16/23 P. v. Nolasco 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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, C097586
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 98F00851)
v.
ESTALIN NOLASCO,
Defendant and Appellant.
Defendant Estalin Nolasco appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for
resentencing under Penal Code1 section 1172.6.2 Appointed counsel filed a brief raising
no arguable issues under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 or People v. Wende
1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
2 Effective June 30, 2022, the Legislature renumbered former section 1170.95 to section
1172.6. (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10.) There were no substantive changes to the statute.
Defendant filed his petition under former section 1170.95, but we will cite to the current
section 1172.6 throughout this opinion.
1
(1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and requesting we exercise our discretion to review the entire
record for arguable issues on appeal.
DISCUSSION
On April 14, 2023, we notified defendant: (1) counsel had filed a brief indicating
no arguable issues had been identified by counsel; (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 People v.
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 have elapsed, and we have received no
communication from defendant.
We consider defendant’s appeal abandoned and order the appeal dismissed.
(People v. Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 232.)
*****
2
DISPOSITION
The appeal is dismissed.
/s/
HORST, J.
We concur:
/s/
DUARTE, Acting P. J.
/s/
RENNER, J.
 Judge of the Placer County Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to
article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
3