Opinion
D078932
11-18-2021
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. INGRID CORONA ESTEVES, Defendant and Appellant.
Rebecca P. Jones, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 Bernardino County No. FWV038646, Arthur Harrison, Judge. Affirmed.
Rebecca P. Jones, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.
In 2009, a jury convicted Ingrid Esteves of first degree murder (Pen. 1 Code, § 187, subd. (a)). Esteves was sentenced to an indeterminate term of 25 years to life in prison. Esteves appealed and this court affirmed the judgment in an unpublished opinion, People v. Esteves et al., D056078 (Mar. 30, 2011).
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
In 2019, Esteves filed a petition for resentencing under section 1170.95. The court appointed counsel and set the matter for hearing. The court found Senate Bill No. 1437 (Stats. 2018, ch. 1015) and section 1170.95 to be unconstitutional.
Esteves appealed the ruling, and this court reversed the dismissal of the petition in an unpublished opinion, People v. Esteves, D075717 (Apr. 24, 2020).
We granted Esteves's request for the court to take judicial notice of our records in case No. D075717.
In 2020, the parties returned to court and the court received briefing, reviewed the record of conviction, and held a hearing. Ultimately, the court determined the jury had not been instructed on felony murder or the doctrine of natural and probable consequences. The court further found Esteves was prosecuted as a direct aider and abettor who acted with malice.
Esteves filed a timely notice of appeal.
Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) indicating counsel has not been able to identify any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered Esteves the opportunity to file her own brief on appeal, but she has not responded.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The facts of the offense are fully set forth in our prior opinion, People v. Esteves et al., supra, D056078. We will not repeat them here.
DISCUSSION
As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks the court to review the record for error. To assist the court in its review, and in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel has identified several possible issues that were considered in evaluating the potential merits of this appeal.
1. Whether Esteves stated a prima facie case for relief by filing a form petition.
2. Whether the absence of felony murder and natural and probable consequences jury instructions demonstrate Esteves's ineligibility as a matter of law.
3. Whether the trial court erred by making credibility determinations from the prior appellate record.
We have reviewed the entire record as required by Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Esteves on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The order denying Esteves's petition for resentencing under section 1170.95 is affirmed.
WE CONCUR: AARON, J., DATO, J.