From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Martirosyan

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX
Jan 28, 2020
2d Crim. No. B297784 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 28, 2020)

Opinion

2d Crim. No. B297784

01-28-2020

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RAFAEL MARTIROSYAN, Defendant and Appellant.

Ann Krausz, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. SA058852)
(Los Angeles County)

In 2006, Rafael Martirosyan was convicted by jury of attempted murder and discharging a weapon from a vehicle. (Pen. Code, §§ 664, 187, 189, 12034, subd. (c).) The jury also found the gun enhancements to be true. (Pen. Code, § 12022.53.) On October 26, 2006, appellant was sentenced to a total of 32 years to life in state prison, consisting of the upper term of seven years for the weapon discharge conviction and a consecutive 25 years for the section 12022.53, subdivision (d) enhancement. Appellant appealed his conviction and sentence. The appeal was final on January 7, 2008. (See People v. Martirosyan (Nov. 6, 2007, B195129) [nonpub. opn.].)

All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise stated. --------

On March 19, 2019, Martirosyan, in pro per, filed a petition for resentencing under Senate Bill No. 620 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.) (Senate Bill No. 620), requesting that the trial court exercise its discretion to strike or dismiss the § 12022.53, subdivision (d) gun enhancement. The trial court denied Martirosyan's petition on March 20, 2019, finding that Senate Bill No. 620 does not affect final judgments.

Martirosyan filed a timely notice of appeal.

We appointed counsel to represent Martirosyan in this appeal. After examining the record, she filed a brief raising no issues.

On August 20, 2019, we advised Martirosyan by mail that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues that he wished to raise on appeal. We received no reply.

We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that Martirosyan's attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

GILBERT, P. J. We concur:

PERREN, J.

TANGEMAN, J.

James R. Dabney and Mark E. Windham, Judges


Superior Court County of Los Angeles

Ann Krausz, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


Summaries of

People v. Martirosyan

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX
Jan 28, 2020
2d Crim. No. B297784 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 28, 2020)
Case details for

People v. Martirosyan

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RAFAEL MARTIROSYAN, Defendant and…

Court:COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX

Date published: Jan 28, 2020

Citations

2d Crim. No. B297784 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 28, 2020)