People v. Gamiochipe CA4/2

Opinion

Filed 2/6/25 P. v. Gamiochipe CA4/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, E084108 v. (Super.Ct.No. FWV23001612)

ADRIAN GAMIOCHIPE, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Michael A. Knish, Judge. Dismissed.

Jennifer A. Gambale, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

1 On December 7, 2023, defendant and appellant Adrian Gamiochipe pled no contest to attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 664, 187, subd. (a)(1), count 4).1 Defendant additionally admitted that in his commission of the attempted murder, he inflicted great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (b)) and personally used a firearm (§12022.5, subd. (b)).

Pursuant to the plea agreement, the court sentenced defendant to 11 years in state prison.

Defendant filed a form petition for resentencing pursuant to section 1172.6. The court denied the petition, finding that persons convicted after the effective date of Senate Bill No. 775 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.) (Stats. 2021, ch. 551; Senate Bill No. 775) were ineligible for resentencing.

Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Delgadillo (2022)

14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo), setting forth a statement of the case, requesting that we independently review the record for error, and raising one potentially arguable issue:

whether the court erred in finding defendant ineligible for relief.

We gave defendant the opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief. We noted that if he did not do so, we could dismiss the appeal; nevertheless, he has not filed one. Under these circumstances, we have no obligation to independently review the record for error. (Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at pp. 224-231.) Rather, we dismiss the appeal. (Id. at pp. 231-232.)

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

2 DISPOSITION

The appeal is dismissed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

McKINSTER Acting P. J.

We concur:

CODRINGTON J.

RAPHAEL J.