Opinion
C090449
09-19-2023
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LUIS FELIPE MENDOZA, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
(Super. Ct. No. STK-CR-FE-1993-5468, SC055414B)
WISEMAN, J. [*]
This appeal arises from the trial court's denial of defendant Luis Felipe Mendoza's petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6.
Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. Effective June 30, 2022, the Legislature renumbered former section 1170.95 to section 1172.6. (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10.) There were no substantive changes to the statute. Defendant filed this petition under former section 1170.95, but we will cite to the current section 1172.6.
On December 14, 1994, a jury found appellant guilty of two counts of first degree murder (§ 187, subd. (a)) with a multiple-murder special-circumstance finding (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(3)), two counts of premeditated and deliberate attempted murder (§§ 664/187, subd. (a)), and one count of permitting another to shoot from a vehicle (former § 12034, subd. (b)). The jury also found firearm enhancements on the murder and attempted murder counts to be true. (Former § 12022, subd. (a)(1).)
On August 8, 2019, appellant filed a petition for resentencing pursuant to section 1172.6. On September 9, 2019, the trial court denied the petition by written order finding defendant "has not and cannot" make a prima facie case that he was entitled to relief under section 1172.6.
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 exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.)
We dismissed the appeal as abandoned in March 2021. The Supreme Court granted defendant's petition for review and transferred this case back to us in June of 2023 with directions to vacate our prior decision and reconsider this case in light of People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo). We vacated our decision.
On June 30, 2023, we notified defendant (with a service copy to his counsel): (1) counsel had filed a brief indicating 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 he wanted this court to consider. In addition, we notified defendant if we did not receive a letter or brief within that 30-day period, the court may dismiss the appeal as abandoned. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from defendant or counsel.
We consider defendant's appeal abandoned and order the appeal dismissed. (Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 232.)
DISPOSITION
The appeal is dismissed.
We concur: DUARTE, Acting P. J., RENNER, J.
[*] Retired Associate Justice of the Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.