Opinion
B299091
03-03-2020
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MANUEL CRUZ MARTINEZ, Defendant and Appellant.
Marta I. Stanton, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA018211) APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Ronald S. Coen, Judge. Affirmed. Marta I. Stanton, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for plaintiff and Respondent.
____________________
In April 1990, Martinez and fellow gang members attacked, beat, and burned a rival gang member. The victim died five days after the attack. The People charged Martinez and the others with murder involving torture and lying in wait (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 190.2, subd. (a)(15) & (18)) and aggravated mayhem (id., § 205). A jury convicted Martinez of aggravated mayhem; the court sentenced him to life with the possibility of parole. He appealed; we affirmed. (People v. Escobar (June 30, 1998, B087052) [nonpub. opn.].)
In 2018, the Legislature enacted Penal Code section 1170.95, which provided an opportunity for resentencing for persons convicted of felony murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine under certain circumstances. (Stats. 2018, ch. 1015, § 4, eff. Jan. 1, 2019.)
On April 22, 2019, Martinez filed a petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1170.95. The trial court denied Martinez's petition on May 2, 2019, explaining that the statute did not apply to Martinez, because he was convicted of aggravated mayhem, not murder. Martinez appealed.
DISCUSSION
We appointed counsel to represent Martinez on this appeal. After review of the record, Martinez's counsel filed an opening brief requesting that this court independently review the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441. On December 30, 2019, we sent a letter to Martinez, advising him that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to consider. We received no response.
We have examined the entire record as well as our previous opinion in this matter, of which we take judicial notice (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (d)). We are satisfied that no arguable legal issues exist and that Martinez's counsel has fully complied with her responsibilities. By virtue of counsel's compliance with the Wende procedure and our review of the record, we are satisfied that Martinez received adequate and effective appellate review of the order entered against him in this case. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441; accord, People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 109-110.)
DISPOSITION
The order is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
JOHNSON, J. We concur:
ROTHSCHILD, P. J.
Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution. --------