Estate of Cordova

Filed 2/28/06 Estate of Cordova CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Yolo)

----

Raymond Santos purports to appeal from an order confirming the sale of property of the estate of Yolanda Cordova. Santos, who is representing himself and is incarcerated in state prison, prepared the notice of appeal on the date the hearing on the confirmation of the sale was scheduled and it was filed four days later. The actual hearing, however, was continued for one week. The hearing was not held, nor was a decision made, until after the notice of appeal was filed. Because the notice of appeal does not meet the criteria for a premature notice of appeal, we must dismiss the appeal.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Yolanda Cordova died intestate on April 8, 2003. She was survived by six children, including Santos. Throughout this proceeding, Santos was incarcerated in state prison.

Cordova owned a one-third interest in real property located at 527 5th Street, West Sacramento. The other two owners of the property were her sisters, Mary Rosales and Alvira Amaro. Rosales petitioned for letters of special administration and sought limited powers to (1) evict anyone living on the property; (2) list the property for sale; (3) sell the property; and (4) disburse one-third of the proceeds of the sale to the estate of Cordova. The probate court granted the petition and issued special letters of administration.

On November 18, 2004, Rosales petitioned to confirm the sale of the property to Sam Phong for $155,099. The hearing on the petition was set for December 2, 2004. Santos submitted objections to the petition, as well as an ex-parte application for an order to be produced for the hearing.

On December 2, 2004, the date set for the hearing, there were no appearances and the matter was continued one week to December 9, 2004. Nevertheless, Santos prepared his notice of appeal from the order confirming the sale on December 2, 2004, and it was filed four days later on December 6. On December 9, the probate court confirmed the sale of the property. It denied Santos's objections and found his application to be produced was moot and ordered that it not be filed.

DISCUSSION

An order confirming the sale of property is appealable. (Prob. Code, § 1300, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 904.1, subd. (a)(10).) The notice of appeal states the appeal is â€