P. v. Davis
Filed 11/17/09 P. v. Davis CA2/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FIVE
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LEVON DAVIS, Defendant and Appellant. | B216391 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA072974) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Norm Shapiro, Judge. Dismissed.
Ann Kraus, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance on behalf of Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant, Levon Davis, purports to appeal from an April 20, 2009 order denying his coram nobis petition. We previously affirmed the judgment in defendants direct appeal. (People v. Davis (Sep. 26, 1994, B080241) [nonpub. opn.].) On May 3, 2007, we summarily denied defendants habeas corpus petition. (In re Davis (May 3, 2007, B198415) [nonpub. order].) On July 25, 2008, we summarily denied a second habeas corpus petition filed by defendant. (In re Davis (Jul. 25, 2008, B209343) [nonpub. order].) We issued an order to show cause re dismissal and set the matter for oral argument as we are required to raise issues concerning jurisdictional questions on our own motion. Jenningsv. Marralle (1994) 8 Cal.4th 121, 126; Olsonv. Cory (1983) 35 Cal.3d 390, 398.)
Penal Code section 1265, subdivision (a) defines the authority of a trial court after an appeal has been filed in the case of a coram nobis petition: After the certificate of the judgment has been remitted to the court below, the appellate court has no further jurisdiction of the appeal or of the proceedings thereon, and all orders necessary to carry the judgment into effect shall be made by the court to which the certificate is remitted. However, if a judgment has been affirmed on appeal no motion shall be made or proceeding in the nature of a petition for a writ of error coram nobis shall be brought to procure the vacation of that judgment, except in the court which affirmed the judgment on appeal. When a judgment is affirmed by a court of appeal and a hearing is not granted by the Supreme Court, the application for the writ shall be made to the court of appeal. Penal Code section 1265, subdivision (a) requires dismissal of an appeal from the denial of a coram nobis petition when the judgment was previously affirmed on direct appeal. (People v. Thomas (1955) 45 Cal.2d 433, 439; People v. Ponce (1951) 103 Cal.2d 271, 272; see People v. Allenthorp (1966) 64 Cal.2d 679, 681.) Thus, we have no jurisdiction to consider defendants appeal.
The appeal is dismissed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
TURNER, P. J.
We concur:
ARMSTRONG, J.
KRIEGLER, J.
Publication courtesy of California pro bono lawyer directory.
Analysis and review provided by Chula Vista Property line attorney.
