Opinion
E074488
06-26-2020
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. KESAUN KEDRON SYKES, Defendant and Appellant.
Siri Shetty, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. SWF026784) OPINION APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. John D. Molloy, Judge. Affirmed. Siri Shetty, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On November 5, 2008, a felony complaint charged defendant and appellant Kesaun Kedron Sykes, along with three codefendants, with the deliberate and premeditated murder of United States Marine Corps Sergeant Janek Pietrzak (count 1) and Janek's wife, Quiana Jenkins-Pietrzak (count 2) under Penal Code section 187, subdivision (a). Additionally, as to both counts, the complaint alleged that (1) defendant had committed multiple murders under Penal Code section 190.2, subdivision (a)(3); (2) the murder was committed while defendant was engaged in the commission of a robbery under Penal Code section 190.2, subdivision (a)(17)(A); and (3) the murder was committed while defendant was engaged in the commission of a burglary under Penal Code section 190.2, subdivision (a)(17)(G). As to count 2, the murder of Quiana Jenkins-Pietrzak, the complaint further alleged that the murder was committed while defendant was engaged in the commission of penetration by a foreign object under Penal Code section 190.2, subdivision (a)(17)(K).
On August 5, 2014, a jury found defendant guilty of the first degree murders, as charged, in counts 1 and 2. As to both counts, the jury also found true the special circumstances that the crimes were committed during the commission of a burglary and robbery under Penal Code section 190.2, subdivision (a)(17)(A) and (G). Additionally, the jury found true the special circumstances of multiple murders under Penal Code section 190.2, subdivision (a)(3), and that defendant committed the murder of Quiana Jenkins-Pietrzak while engaged in the commission of penetration by a foreign object under Penal Code section 190.2, subdivision (a)(17)(K).
On August 21, 2014, the jury imposed the death penalty.
On November 7, 2014, the trial court denied defendant's motion to modify the death penalty verdict to the lesser punishment of life in prison without the possible of parole. The trial court sentenced defendant to death. Defendant's appeal to the California Supreme Court is pending, case Number S222619.
On October 28, 2019, defendant filed a petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1170.95. On November 15, 2019, the trial court dismissed defendant's petition without prejudice because of the pending direct appeal in the California Supreme Court.
On January 6, 2020, defendant filed this appeal from the trial court's dismissal of his Penal Code section 1170.95 petition.
DISCUSSION
Because the appeal of the underlying convictions is pending before the California Supreme court, the facts pertaining to the underlying crimes are not in the record on this appeal. Moreover, the underlying facts are not relevant to this appeal. --------
After defendant appealed, and upon his request, this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues, and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record. Pursuant to Anders, counsel identified the following issue to assist the court in its search of the record for error: "Whether the trial court erred by dismissing the petition for resentencing under section 1170.95?"
We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, but he has not done so. Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have independently reviewed the record for potential error, and find no arguable issue for reversal on appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
MILLER
J. We concur: McKINSTER
Acting P. J. FIELDS
J.