People v. Jackson 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 follow the procedures set forth in Serrano: 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.) Jackson does not make a legal argument in his supplemental brief in support of his request to reduce his restitution fine. Instead, he notes that he has managed to pay a little less than half of the $10,000 fine during the 27 years he has served in prison. According to Jackson, “it’s hard to take care of myself after restitution is taken monthly from my prison wages.” This has been especially true recently, as prices for goods in prison have increased. We sympathize with Jackson’s plight, but the law does not allow us to…