THE PEOPLE v. JORGE MARQUEZ CANO (2011)

Court of Appeal, Second District, California.

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JORGE MARQUEZ CANO, Defendant and Appellant.

B231804

Decided: May 27, 2011

Richard B. Lennon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General and Shira B. Seigle, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

Defendant, Jorge Marquez Cano, purports to appeal from a March 4, 2011 post-judgment order denying his motion to vacate. The post-judgment motion argued that defendant is the victim of mistaken identity. We have a duty to raise issues concerning our jurisdiction on our own motion and issued an order to show cause re: dismissal on our own motion. (Jennings v. Marralle (1994) 8 Cal.4th 121, 126; Olson v. Cory (1983) 35 Cal.3d 390, 398.) The post-judgment March 4, 2011 order may not be appealable. (People v. Cantrell (1961) 197 Cal.App.2d 40, 43; People v. Bowles (1933) 135 Cal.App. 514, 516; see People v. Thomas (1959) 52 Cal.2d 521, 527; see 6 Witkin & Epstein, Cal.Criminal Law (3d ed. 2000) “Criminal Appeals,” § 53, p. 299.)

The appeal is dismissed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

We concur:

KUMAR, J.^*

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE. FN*. Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

KRIEGLER, J.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network