Filed 11/26/13 P. v. Alva CA4/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for
publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication
or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent, E058821
v. (Super.Ct.No. FSB047828)
ALBERT JOSEPH ALVA, OPINION
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Michael A. Smith,
Judge. (Retired judge of the San Bernardino Super. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice
pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.) Affirmed.
Leslie A. Rose, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant and appellant Albert Joseph Alva appeals after the trial court denied his
petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1170.126, known as the Three Strikes
1
Reform Act of 2012. (Prop. 36, as approved by voters, Gen. Elec. Nov. 7, 2012.)1
Defendant filed a notice of appeal on May 24, 2013. We affirm.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On June 8, 2000, a jury found defendant guilty of first degree residential burglary.
(§ 459, count 1.) The jury also found that defendant had eight prior strike convictions
(§§ 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d) & 667, subds. (b)-(i)), that he was convicted of two serious
felonies within the meaning of section 667, subdivision (a)(1), and that he had served one
prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). The court sentenced him to state prison for 25
years to life on count 1, plus 11 years on the enhancements, for a total term of 36 years to
life.
On April 24, 2013, defendant filed an in pro. per. petition for resentencing under
section 1170.126. The court denied the petition since defendant’s current conviction was
for a serious offense, which made him ineligible for resentencing under section 1170.126.
(§ 1170.126, subd. (e)(1).)
ANALYSIS
After the notice of appeal was filed, this court appointed counsel to represent
defendant. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25
Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d
493], setting forth a statement of the case, a brief statement of the facts, and identifying
1 All further statutory references will be to the Penal Code, unless otherwise
noted.
2
one potential arguable issue: whether the trial court erred in denying defendant’s petition
for resentencing under section 1170.126.
Defendant was offered an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which
he has not done. Under People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have conducted an
independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
HOLLENHORST
J.
We concur:
RAMIREZ
P. J.
KING
J.
3