P. v. Maldonando
P. v. Maldonando
Filed 9/15/08 P. v. Maldonando 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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,
v.
ANTOINETTE MALDONADO,
Defendant and Appellant. |
E045285
(Super.Ct.No. FCH700468)
OPINION |
APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Douglas M. Elwell, Judge. Affirmed.
James R. Bostwick, Jr., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
statement of the case
Defendant, Antoinette Maldonado, was charged in a felony complaint with one count of aggravated battery by gassing upon a peace officer (Pen. Code, 4501.1, subd. (a)).[1] Defendant plead not guilty at her arraignment on October 25, 2007. At the pre-preliminary hearing conference on November 6, 2007 the court declared a doubt as to defendants mental competence ( 1368). The trial court suspended the criminal proceedings and ordered a medical report. On January 17, 2008, the district attorney and defendants counsel stipulated to the doctors report. The trial court found that defendant was competent to proceed to trial and ordered criminal proceedings reinstated.
Thereafter, pursuant to section 859a, defendant, represented by counsel, pled nolo contendere to a violation of section 4501.1, subdivision (a) as charged in count one of the felony complaint. In accordance with the negotiated disposition it was agreed that defendant would receive a consecutive two year state prison sentence.
On February 25, 2008 defendant filed a notice of appeal. On March 17, 2008 an amended notice of appeal that had been executed on March 13, 2008 was filed.
statement of facts
The record contains no information about the facts of the offense. Counsel for the People and the defendant both stipulated that the incident reports contained an adequate factual basis for defendants plea of guilty.
Defendant appealed, and upon her request this court appointed counsel to represent her. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493] setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record.
We offered the defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which she has not done.
We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
Disposition
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
RAMIREZ
P.J.
We concur:
McKINSTER
J.
MILLER
J.
Publication Courtesy of San Diego County Legal Resource Directory.
Analysis and review provided by San Diego County Property line attorney.
San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com
[1] All further references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
|
