Filed 5/15/18 P. v. Ramirez CA6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT


THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

FRANK RAMIREZ,

Defendant and Appellant.
H045313
(Santa Clara County
Super. Ct. No. 178164)

On July 21, 1995, defendant Frank Ramirez was convicted of possession for sale of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378), and possession of a firearm by a felon (Pen. Code, §. 12021, subd. (a)(1)). On April 17, 2016, defendant was sentenced to 29 years to life under the Three Strikes law (§ 667, subds. (b)-(i)). In the years since his conviction, defendant has filed multiple petitions for writ of habeas corpus and for resentencing, all of which have been denied.
On September 11, 2017, defendant filed a petition for resentencing pursuant to section 1170.18, subdivision (a). The district attorney opposed the petition, arguing that it should be denied because the crimes do not qualify for resentencing. On October 20, 2017, the trial court denied the petition. The trial court found that defendant’s petition sought relief that had previously been denied, and that he was not eligible for the requested relief because his convictions were not subject to the resentencing provisions of section 1170.18. Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal on November 30, 2017.
This court appointed counsel to represent appellant in this court. Appointed counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, which states the case and the facts but raises no specific issues. This court treated the brief as filed under People v. Serrano (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 496 (Serrano). On February 5, 2018, this court notified appellant of his right pursuant to Serrano to submit a supplemental brief on his own behalf within 30 days. (Id. at p. 503.) On March 9, 2018, this court received a supplemental statement from appellant.
In his supplemental statement, defendant appears to challenge his sentence. He contends that he was “sentenced to a third strike sentence of 25 years to life,” and that the trial court failed to exercise its discretion to strike his strike prior. He argues that the court should have done so in the interest of justice pursuant to the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. However, defendant’s sentence has long been final, and he may not challenge it on appeal from an order denying his petition for resentencing pursuant to section 1170.18. Defendant fails to articulate any error made by the trial court in denying the petition.
As nothing in defendant’s supplemental statement raises an arguable issue on appeal from the order denying the petition for resentencing, we must dismiss the appeal. (Serrano, supra, 211 Cal.App.4th at pp. 503-504.)
DISPOSITION
The appeal is dismissed.



____________________________________
BAMATTRE-MANOUKIAN, J.





WE CONCUR:




_________________________________
GREENWOOD, P.J.









_________________________________
PREMO, J.