# People v. Brown CA4/2

> California Court of Appeal · February 28, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10814380

## Case

- **Court:** California Court of Appeal
- **Decided:** February 28, 2025
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10814380

## Opinion text

Filed 2/28/25 P. v. Brown 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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, E083510

v. (Super.Ct.No. FVA701587)

TERENCE DION BROWN, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Michael Camber,

Judge. Dismissed.

Michelle T. LiVecchi-Raufi, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for

Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.

1
INTRODUCTION

Defendant Terence Dion Brown appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for

resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6. Counsel filed a brief raising no arguable

issues under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo).

On December 20, 2024, we notified defendant: (1) counsel filed a brief indicating

no arguable issues had been identified; (2) as a case arising from an order denying

postconviction relief, this court was not required to conduct an independent review of the

record, but we could do so in our discretion; and (3) in accordance with the procedures

set forth in Delgadillo, he had 30 days in which to file a supplemental brief raising any

argument he wanted this court to consider. We also notified defendant that if we did not

receive a brief within that 30-day period, we may dismiss the appeal as abandoned. More

than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from defendant. We

consider defendant's appeal abandoned and order the appeal dismissed. (Delgadillo,

supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 232.)

2
DISPOSITION

The appeal is dismissed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

FIELDS
J.

We concur:

RAMIREZ
P. J.

MILLER
J.

3

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10814380. Public record. Not legal advice.