People v. Brigham CA2/7

INTRODUCTION

Tyreece Brigham, represented by counsel, appeals from a judgment after pleading no contest to having a concealed firearm in a vehicle in violation of Penal Code section 25400, subdivision (a)(1).1 Brigham challenges his conviction by asserting that section 25400 is unconstitutional in light of the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (2022) 597 U.S. 1 (Bruen) and the high court’s potential grant of a writ of certiorari in Nichols v. Newsom (9th Cir. Sept. 12, 2022, No. 14-55873) 2022

WL 4295404.

Brigham’s opening brief, however, fails to present any argument explaining how or why section 25400 violates the Second Amendment. Given the summary nature of his argument, we conclude Brigham has forfeited his constitutional challenge. (See People v. Caro (2019) 7 Cal.5th 463, 512.) We affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

At approximately midnight on May 16, 2022, police officers conducted a traffic stop when they observed Brigham make unsafe lane changes and an illegal U-turn. After Brigham consented to a search of the vehicle, the officers recovered a

All undesignated statutory references are to…