From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Mena

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX
Jul 21, 2015
2d Crim. No. B261292 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 21, 2015)

Opinion

2d Crim. No. B261292

07-21-2015

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SALVADOR MENA, Defendant and Appellant.

California Appellate Project, Jonathan B. Steiner, Executive Director, Richard B. Lennon, Staff Attorney, under appointments 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. F278034)
(San Luis Obispo County)

Salvador Mena appeals the trial court's order denying his petition for resentencing pursuant to Proposition 36, the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012 ("the Act"). (Pen. Code, § 1170.126.) Appellant is serving a sentence of 25 years to life as a result of his 1999 conviction for possessing a controlled substance in a jail facility (§ 4573.6) and his admission of two prior strikes. The court found that appellant's prior convictions for committing lewd and lascivious acts on a child under the age of 14 (§ 288, subd. (a)) render him statutorily ineligible for resentencing under the Act. (§§ 1170.12, subd. (c)(2)(C)(iv), 1170.126, subd. (e)(3).)

All further statutory references are to the Penal Code. --------

We appointed counsel to represent appellant on appeal. After counsel's examination of the record, he filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised.

On April 14, 2015, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. No response has been received from appellant.

We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that appellant's attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 443; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 126.)

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

PERREN, J. We concur:

GILBERT, P. J.

YEGAN, J.

Jacquelyn H. Duffy, Judge


Superior Court County of San Luis Obispo

California Appellate Project, Jonathan B. Steiner, Executive Director, Richard B. Lennon, Staff Attorney, under appointments by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


Summaries of

People v. Mena

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX
Jul 21, 2015
2d Crim. No. B261292 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 21, 2015)
Case details for

People v. Mena

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SALVADOR MENA, Defendant and…

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

Date published: Jul 21, 2015

Citations

2d Crim. No. B261292 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 21, 2015)