People v. Martin CA2/1

Opinion

Filed 4/13/26 P. v. Martin CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

THE PEOPLE, B342906

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. YA065541) v.

VICTOR DONTE MARTIN,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Laura C. Ellison, Judge. Dismissed. Sally Patrone, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_______________________________ In 2008, a jury convicted Victor Dante Martin on 10 counts, including home invasion robbery, false imprisonment by violence, and sodomy and forcible rape by force and fear, and found several special allegations to be true. The trial court found recidivism allegations to be true and sentenced Martin to an indeterminate term of 100 years to life and a determinate term of 33 years 8 months. We affirmed the conviction on direct appeal. (People v. Martin (Aug. 20, 2009, B209508) [nonpub. opn.].) Martin sustained serious injuries in prison, which rendered him paraplegic. In 2024, he filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking compassionate release under Penal Code section 1172.2, which authorizes the court to recall the sentence of an incarcerated individual who suffers from a qualifying medical condition. The court summarily denied the petition. Martin appealed. His appointed appellate counsel filed a brief raising no issues and requesting that we independently review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues pursuant to People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216. Martin filed a supplemental brief raising issues outside the scope of his appeal from denial of his habeas corpus petition. No appeal lies from the denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus. (In re Clark (1993) 5 Cal.4th 750, 767, fn. 7 [“a prisoner whose petition has been denied by the superior court can obtain review of his claims only by the filing of a new petition in the Court of Appeal”].) Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

2 DISPOSITION Martin’s appeal is dismissed. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

ROTHSCHILD, P. J. We concur:

BENDIX, J.

WEINGART, J.