Filed 8/30/23 P. v. Trujillo CA4/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, E081265 v. (Super.Ct.No. FRE007327) RAMIRO TRUJILLO, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. David Cohn, Judge.

Dismissed.

Richard L. Fitzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

On October 11, 2007, a jury convicted defendant and appellant, Ramiro Trujillo, of attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 664, 187, count 1).1 The jury additionally found true

an allegation that defendant had personally and intentionally discharged a firearm in his commission of the attempted murder. (§ 12022.53, subd. (c).)2 The court sentenced defendant to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 27 years to life. (Trujillo, supra, E044417.)

On June 10, 2022, defendant filed a form petition for resentencing pursuant to former section 1170.95.3 After a hearing on May 5, 2023, at which defendant was represented by counsel, the trial court denied the petition.

On appeal, defendant’s appointed counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo), setting forth a statement of the case, requesting that we exercise our discretion to independently review the record for error, and identifying one potentially arguable issue: whether the court erred in denying defendant’s petition.

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.)

DISPOSITION The appeal is dismissed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

McKINSTER Acting P. J.

We concur:

MILLER J.

CODRINGTON J.