People v. Saldana CA5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 15, 2025F087779California931 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

Appellant and defendant Danny Perez Saldana (appellant) was convicted of first degree burglary and other offenses. He was sentenced to the second strike term of 19 years and the trial court imposed a restitution fine and fees. In 2023, appellant filed a petition pursuant to Penal Code1 section 1465.9 to vacate the trial court’s imposition of the restitution fine and other fees. The court denied the petition and found the statue was inapplicable to the fine and fees imposed in appellant’s case. On appeal, appellate counsel filed a brief that summarized the facts with citations to the record, raised no issues, and asked this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436; People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216.) Appellant did not file a supplemental brief on his own behalf. We affirm.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On December 15, 2014, a second amended information was filed in the Superior Court of Fresno County charging appellant with committing the following offenses on or about October 15, 2013: count 1, first degree residential burglary (§§ 459/460, subd. (a)); count 2, criminal threats (§ 422) with an enhancement for personal use of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.