Opinion
E080178
04-20-2023
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SHANE ALLEN MAJOR, Defendant and Appellant.
Dawn S. Mortazavi, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Bernardino County Super.Ct.No. FVI011354, Christopher S. Pallone, Judge. Dismissed by opinion.
Dawn S. Mortazavi, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
SLOUGH J.
Shane Allen Major filed a petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1170.95 (now §1172.6). We dismiss Major's appeal of the order denying the petition as abandoned because appointed counsel identified no arguable issue for appeal and appellant declined to file a supplemental brief identifying any issue when invited to do so.
BACKGROUND
Shane Allen Major pled guilty on January 21, 2003 to first degree murder and was sentenced to 25 years to life in prison. On March 10, 2020, he filed a petition for resentencing arguing he wasn't the actual killer and wasn't a major participant in the killing. (People v. Major (Mar. 30, 2022, E077655) ) The trial court denied the petition after an evidentiary hearing, finding Major was a major participant in the underlying robbery and acted with reckless indifference to human life. (Ibid.) We affirmed. (Ibid.)
On August 2, 2022, Major filed a second petition for resentencing. The trial court denied the second petition on the ground it was collaterally estopped. Major filed a notice of appeal from the order denying his second petition.
Major's counsel filed a brief raising no issues, and we gave defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, but he declined.
ANALYSIS
This is an appeal from a postjudgment order, so People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 do not require us to read the entire record to look for arguable grounds for reversal. (People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216, 228.) Major's counsel has asked us to conduct such a review, and we do have discretion to conduct a Wende review even when it is not required. However, we decline to do so in this case. "The state . . . has an interest in an 'economical and expeditious resolution' of an appeal from a decision that is 'presumptively accurate and just.'" (Delgadillo, at pp. 229, 232.) We find no case-specific reason to conduct a full independent review and therefore dismiss Major's appeal as abandoned.
DISPOSITION
We dismiss the appeal.
We concur: RAMIREZ, P. J., CODRINGTON, J.