People v. Torricellas CA4/1

DISCUSSION

As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks the court to review the record for error. To assist the court in its review, and in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel

We grant appellant’s request for judicial notice of this court’s record in case No. D077815.

The facts of the offense are not relevant to the resolution of this appeal. We will omit a statement of facts. 2 has identified the following possible issue which was considered in evaluating the potential merits of this appeal. Whether it was error for the trial court to deny the petition under section 1170.95 on the grounds a previous petition had been filed and denied. In her lengthy brief, Appellant argues many issues. She claims the law of the case doctrine did not apply here because she raised new issues in her second petition and her separate habeas petition. She contends the prosecution violated her 1985 plea agreement by using her statements, under oath at the time of the plea, in the review of her 2019 petition. She claims the statements she made were false and were only made to accomplish the guilty plea. Appellant claims her…