Opinion
D083375
10-18-2024
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DARRYL LEE DUNSMORE, Defendant and Appellant.
Darryl Lee Dunsmore, in pro. per.; and Jared G. Coleman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County No. SCS215653, Garry G. Haehnle, Judge. Affirmed.
Darryl Lee Dunsmore, in pro. per.; and Jared G. Coleman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.
In 2010, Darryl Lee Dunsmore was convicted of attempted voluntary manslaughter while personally inflicting great bodily injury (Pen. Code,§§ 192, subd. (a), 664, &12022.7, subd. (a)), assault with a deadly weapon while inflicting great bodily injury (§§ 245, subd. (a)(1), 12022.7, subd. (a)), and a second count of assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)). The court found true a serious felony prior conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)), a prison prior (§ 667.5, subd. (b)), and a strike prior (§ 667, subds. (b)-(i)).
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
Dunsmore was ultimately sentenced to a determinate term of 21 years in prison.
Dunsmore appealed, and this court affirmed the conviction in an unpublished opinion. (People v. Dunsmore (Dec. 21, 2011, D057645).)
Dunsmore has filed at least six appeals in this case complaining about multiple issues, in addition to this appeal, addressing the denial of his petition for resentencing under section 1172.6.
In 2021, Dunsmore filed a petition for resentencing under section 1170.95 (now renumbered section 1172.6). The trial court found Dunsmore was not eligible for resentencing under the statute. Dunsmore appealed, and this court affirmed in an unpublished opinion. (People v. Dunsmore (June 30, 2022, D079851).)
Dunsmore filed his second petition for resentencing under section 1172.6 The trial court again found him ineligible for relief under section 1172.6.
Dunsmore again filed a notice of appeal.
Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo) indicating counsel has not been able to identify any potentially meritorious issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to exercise its discretion to independently review the record for error. We informed Dunsmore he could file his brief on appeal. He has responded with a supplemental brief.
Dunsmore complains about numerous issues, including assistance of counsel, his conviction, and various sentencing topics including custody credits. He does not address the issue in this appeal of whether a person convicted of attempted voluntary manslaughter can seek relief under section 1172.6. His supplemental brief does not raise any potentially meritorious issues in this appeal from denial of his petition under section 1172.6.
DISCUSSION
As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Delgadillo brief and asks the court to independently review the record for error. To assist the court and in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel has identified three possible issues that were considered in evaluating the potential merits of this appeal:
1. Whether the court should order resentencing in the interests of justice. 2. Whether a conviction for attempted manslaughter is eligible for relief under section 1172.6. 3. Whether custody credits were properly applied.
We have exercised our discretion to independently review the record for error. Our review of the record has not identified any potentially meritorious issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Dunsmore in this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The order denying Dunsmore's second petition for resentencing under section 1172.6 is affirmed.
WE CONCUR: DO, J. CASTILLO, J.