People v. Lynex CA2/1

DISCUSSION

When a defendant’s appointed counsel files a brief raising no issues in an appeal of a denial of postconviction relief, we are not obligated to review the record independently to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Cole (2020) 52 Cal.App.5th 1023, 1039 (Cole), review granted Oct. 14, 2020, S264278.) The defendant has a right, however, to file a supplemental brief. (Ibid.) If he does so, “the Court of Appeal is required to evaluate any arguments presented in that brief and to issue a written opinion that disposes of the trial court’s order on the merits.” (Id. at p. 1040.) Lynex raises one issue in his supplemental brief. He contends that his parole revocation fine is an unauthorized sentence because of Assembly Bill No. 1869 (2019−2020 Reg. Sess.) (Assembly Bill No. 1869) (Stats. 2020, ch. 92), which he describes as “an ameliorative change to the law that eliminated fees related to mandatory supervision, effective January 1, 2022.” Lynex is correct that an unauthorized sentence, including an unauthorized fine, can be corrected at any time, even if the defendant failed to object when it was first imposed. (People v.

3 Valenzuela (2009)…