People v. Thomas CA4/3

── People v. Thomas CA4/3 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: April 15, 2026 Category: General Filed 4/15/26 P. v. Thomas CA4/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, G065432 v. (Super. Ct. No. 12CF1810) CHAD HOLBERT THOMAS, OPINION Defendant and Appellant. Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Richard M. King, Judge. Affirmed. Chad Holbert Thomas, in pro. per.; Lisa A. Kopelman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *  In 2013, defendant Chad Holbert Thomas pleaded guilty to 15 counts of robbery and related charges. The trial court imposed a negotiated 40-year sentence that included three five-year serious felony (nickel) priors. 1 (Pen. Code, § 667, subd. (a)(1).) In 2022, upon a recommendation of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), the court recalled the matter, and struck one of the nickel priors. (§ 1172.1.) In this appeal from the resentencing order, appointed appellate counsel filed a brief raising no arguable issues. (See People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216, 230 (Delgadillo); People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441–442 (Wende).) Thomas later filed a supplemental brief on his own behalf. In the interests of justice, this court has independently reviewed the record and found no arguable issues. (See Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 230 [“if the appellate court wishes, it may also exercise its discretion to conduct its own independent review of the record in the interest of justice”].) We will briefly address the issues Thomas raises in his supplemental brief and affirm the order of the trial court. I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In 2013, the People filed an amended information charging Thomas with 15 counts of robbery, one count of making criminal threats, and one count of assault with a firearm. As to all of the counts except the criminal threats count, the information alleged a personal use of a firearm enhancement. The information further alleged nine prior strike convictions, and three serious felony prior convictions (nickel priors). 1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2  In 2013, pursuant to a plea agreement, Thomas pleaded guilty to the 17 counts, admitted the 16 firearm enhancements, and admitted the three serious felony prior enhancements. The trial court struck the prior strike convictions and imposed the three nickel priors. The court sentenced Thomas to a total negotiated term of 40 years in prison, with presentence credit for time served, along with various fines and fees. On August 11, 2022, the trial court received a letter from the CDCR recommending recall and resentencing under former section 1170.03 (now § 1172.1), advising that recent amendments to the Penal Code gave discretion to trial courts to strike five-year serious felony prior enhancements in the interest of justice. The CDCR letter summarized Thomas’s prior juvenile and adu