Filed 12/2/25 P. v. Uhuru CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D084190 Plaintiff and Respondent, v. (Super. Ct. No. SCD123050) DIALLO EARL UHURU, Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Peter C. Deddeh, Judge. Affirmed.

Diallo Earl Uhuru, in pro. per.; and Jared G. Coleman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

In 2000, Diallo Earl Uhuru pleaded guilty to one count of second degree murder (Pen. Code,1 § 187, subd. (a)) and admitted a firearm enhancement.

The agreed sentence was 25 years to life in prison.

1 Statutory references are to the Penal Code. In 2019, Uhuru filed a petition for resentencing under section 1170.91, based on his mental health and military history. The trial court denied the petition and the Court of Appeal affirmed the denial.

In August 2023, Uhuru filed another motion for resentencing, again based on his mental health and military history. The trial court held a hearing and then denied the second petition for resentencing.

Uhuru filed a timely notice of appeal.

Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 indicating counsel has not been able to identify any potentially meritorious issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to exercise its discretion to conduct an independent review for error as we would do if the case was controlled by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.

We have exercised our discretion and independently reviewed the record for error.

We advised Uhuru of his right to file his own brief on appeal. He has responded by filing a supplemental brief.

In his supplemental brief, Uhuru complains about his appellate counsel for not raising issues on appeal. Uhuru also claims his mental health issues and military history should warrant a medical parole hearing and a new appellate counsel.

Uhuru has not identified any potentially meritorious issues that would warrant reversal on appeal based on this record.

DISCUSSION We have reviewed the record for error and have not discovered any potentially meritorious issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Uhuru on this appeal.

DISPOSITION The order denying Uhuru’s petition for resentencing is affirmed.

HUFFMAN, J.* WE CONCUR:

MCCONNELL, P. J.

KELETY, J.

* Retired Associate Justice of the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.