Opinion
2d Crim. No. B257547
06-04-2015
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DARIUS MATTHEW SHADZAD, Defendant and Appellant.
California Appellate Project, Jonathan B. Steiner and Cheryl Lutz, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115 . (Super. Ct. No. F392359)
(San Luis Obispo County)
Appellant was convicted by jury of possessing a deadly weapon in a penal institution. (Pen. Code, § 4502, subd. (a).) Because he had two prior "strike" convictions, the trial court sentenced him to an indeterminate 25-year-to-life term under the three strikes law. (Id., §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i); 1170.12.) He appealed that judgment and we affirmed it. (April 6, 2009, B203754 [nonpub. opn.].)
We grant appellant's request and have taken judicial notice of the records in Case No. B203754. (Evid. Code, § 452.)
On January 10, 2014, appellant moved to recall his sentence pursuant to Proposition 36. (Pen. Code, § 1170.126.) In denying the motion, the trial court reasoned that appellant was ineligible for resentencing because he was armed with a deadly weapon at the time he committed the offense. (Id., §§ 1170.12, subd. (c)(2)(C)(iii); 1170.126, subd. (e)(2).)
We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. After counsel's examination of the record she filed a brief raising no issues and requesting our independent review pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. We notified appellant that he had 30 days in which to advise us of any claims he wished us to consider. We have received no response.
We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that appellant's counsel has fully complied with her responsibilities, and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 123-124; People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)
The judgment (order) is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.
PERREN, J. We concur:
GILBERT, P. J.
YEGAN, J.
John A. Trice, Judge
Superior Court County of San Luis Obispo
California Appellate Project, Jonathan B. Steiner and Cheryl Lutz, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.