Filed 7/23/26 P. v. Alfaro CA2/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR
THE PEOPLE, B346561
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County
Super. Ct. No. 24AHCF00240-01)
v.
IVAN J. ALFARO,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los
Angeles County, Karen Joynt, Judge. Affirmed.
Heather E. Shallenberger, under appointment by the Court
of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant Ivan J. Alfaro was charged by information with
unauthorized use of personal identifying information. (Pen.
Code,1 § 530.5, subd. (a).) The information also alleged
aggravating factors under California Rules of Court,
rule 4.421(b)(2), (b)(3), and special allegations pursuant to
section 1203, subdivision (e)(4) (restricted probation eligibility as
a result of prior felony convictions) and sections 667 and 1170.12
(prior strike convictions).
A jury found Alfaro guilty as charged. In a bifurcated
proceeding, the trial court found true all special allegations and
aggravating factors. At sentencing, the court granted the
defense’s motion to strike Alfaro’s prior strike convictions under
People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497. The
court suspended imposition of sentence and placed Alfaro on
probation for two years. As a condition of probation, he was
ordered to serve 270 days in jail.
Alfaro timely appealed. His appointed counsel filed an
opening brief raising no issues and asking this court to
independently review the record pursuant to People v. Wende
(1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. We directed counsel to send the record and
a copy of the opening brief to Alfaro and notified Alfaro of his
right to respond within 30 days. We received no response.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that
no arguable issues exist and that Alfaro’s appellate attorney has
complied with the responsibilities of counsel. (Smith v. Robbins
(2000) 528 U.S. 259, 278; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106,
119.)
1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
2
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
MORI, Acting P. J.
We concur:
TAMZARIAN, J.
COGLIATI, J. **
** Judge of the Santa Cruz County Superior Court, assigned by the
Chief Justice pursuant to Article VI, section 6, of the California
Constitution.
3