People v. Briggs CA5

── People v. Briggs CA5 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: April 17, 2026 Category: General Filed 4/17/26 P. v. Briggs CA5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT THE PEOPLE, F089731 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. F22904417) v. JOHNNY LEE BRIGGS, OPINION Defendant and Appellant. THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. William Terrence, Judge. Johnny Lee Briggs, in pro. per.; and John F. Schuck, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo- * Before Levy, Acting P. J., Detjen, J. and Meehan, J.  Defendant Johnny Lee Briggs filed a “PETITION FOR DISMISSAL (Military Personnel).” The trial court denied the petition. On appeal, appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo),1 identifying no error. Defendant was afforded an opportunity to submit a letter brief, and he submitted a letter brief and a supplemental letter brief. After reviewing the record and considering the contentions raised by defendant, we affirm. PROCEDURAL HISTORY AND BACKGROUND On October 5, 2022, a jury found defendant guilty of first degree murder (Pen. Code,2 § 187, subd. (a)). The jury also found true that defendant personally and intentionally discharged a firearm, causing great bodily injury or death (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)). On November 2, 2022, defendant was sentenced to an aggregate term of 50 years to life. On February 3, 2025, defendant, proceeding in propria persona, filed Judicial Council Form CR-183/MIL-183, “PETITION FOR DISMISSAL (Military Personnel).” This form cites section 17, subdivision (b) and section 1170.9, subdivision (h). In signing the form, defendant asserted that he was granted probation in this case. Defendant asked the court to reduce his felony conviction to a misdemeanor; to set aside the verdict of guilt, allow him to enter a not guilty plea, and dismiss the action; and to seal police records of the arrest and court records of the dismissed action. On April 11, 2025, the 1 Pursuant to Delgadillo, which applies to certain postconviction proceedings, we are not required to conduct an independent review of the entire record. (People v. Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at pp. 222–227, 232; People v. Rosemond (2025) 108 Cal.App.5th 667, 671–674.) Instead, when a defendant files a letter brief, as defendant did here, we are only “required to evaluate the specific arguments presented in that brief and to issue a written opinion.” (Delgadillo, at p. 232.) This procedure does not bar us from exercising our discretion to conduct an independent review of the record. (Rosemond, at p. 673.) 2 All further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2. court denied the petition on the ground that “[s]ections 17[, subdivision b] and 1170.9[, subdivision h] are not applicable to [d]efendant’s sentence.” On April 28, 2025, defendant timely filed a notice of appeal. DISCUSSION3 As noted above, de