People v. Alford CA2/6

Discussion Where, as here, appointed counsel finds no arguable issues in an appeal that is not from the first appeal after conviction, appellant is not entitled to our independent review of the record

2 The following procedural facts are taken from our opinion on direct appeal, People v. Alford (July 26, 2022, B312837) [nonpub. opn.].

2 pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, or its federal constitutional counterpart, Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738. (Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 226.) He is, however, entitled to appellate consideration of any contentions raised in his supplemental brief. (Id. at p. 232.) But first, we address the issue of appealability. “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 an order must be dismissed.’” (People v. King (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 629, 634.) Here, the trial court did not have jurisdiction to modify…