Opinion
C094428
06-09-2023
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ROSANN LEITE, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
(Super. Ct. No. 04F09696)
OPINION ON TRANSFER
RENNER, J.
This appeal arises from the trial court's denial of defendant Rosann Leite's petition for resentencing under former Penal Code section 1170.95. We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that set forth the relevant procedural history of the case and asked this court to review the record and determine whether any arguable issues on appeal existed. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We dismissed that appeal, and the Supreme Court granted defendant's petition for review and transferred the case back to us with directions to vacate our prior decision and reconsider the matter in light of People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo). We vacated our decision. Counsel filed a brief on transfer raising no arguable issues under Delgadillo and requests that we exercise our discretion to review the entire record for arguable issues on appeal or comply with the notice procedures approved in Delgadillo.
Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. The Legislature amended section 1170.95 effective January 1, 2022, under Senate Bill No. 775 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.) (Stats. 2021, ch. 551). Further, effective June 30, 2022, the Legislature renumbered section 1170.95 to section 1172.6 without substantive change. (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10.)
I. DISCUSSION
On April 10, 2023, we notified defendant that: (1) counsel had filed a brief indicating that 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 Delgadillo, defendant had 30 days in which to file a supplemental brief or letter raising any argument she wanted this court to consider. In addition, we notified defendant that if we did not receive a letter or brief within that 30-day period, the court may dismiss the appeal as abandoned. Defendant did not timely file a letter or brief within the 30-day period.
We consider defendant's appeal abandoned and order it dismissed. (Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 232.)
II. DISPOSITION
The appeal is dismissed.
We concur: DUARTE, Acting P. J., KRAUSE, J.