People v. Sanchez CA3

DISCUSSION

Appointed counsel for defendant filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and asking this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant filed a supplemental brief reprising his arguments that his “restitution fine” should be waived or modified. From what we can discern, defendant also argues counsel was ineffective in advising him about, and preserving his challenge to, the fines. Defendant, however, has appealed from a nonappealable order, as the trial court lacked jurisdiction to modify defendant’s sentence in his long-final judgment. “The general rule is that ‘once a judgment is rendered and execution of the sentence has begun, the trial court does not have jurisdiction to vacate or modify the sentence.’ [Citations.] And, ‘[i]f the trial court does not have jurisdiction to rule on a motion to vacate or modify a sentence, an order denying such a motion is nonappealable, and any appeal from such

2 an order must be dismissed.’ ” (People v. King (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 629, 634, petn. for review pending, petn. filed May 24, 2022.) “There are important exceptions…