P. v. Barragan
Filed 6/26/12 P. v.
Barragan CA3
NOT
TO BE PUBLISHED
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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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.
COPY
IN THE COURT OF
APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE
DISTRICT
(San
Joaquin)
----
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
PRINCE ANTHONY BARRAGAN,
Defendant and Appellant.
C069336
(Super.
Ct. No. TF036468A)
This case comes to
us pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (
record as required by Wende, we
affirm the judgment.
We provide the following brief description
of the facts and procedural history of the case. (Kelly,
On August 4, 2011, pursuant to a
plea bargain, defendant Prince Anthony Barragan pled no contest to assault by
means of force likely to produce great bodily
§ 245, subd. (a)(1)) in exchange for the dismissal of a second related
charge, a promise of no state prison
at the outset, and an agreement that if he successfully completed three years
of a five-year probation period, the prosecution would have no objection to the
court’s reducing the offense to a misdemeanor.
Following
defendant’s change of plea, he waived his right to a probation report and the
court suspended imposition of sentence and placed him on formal probation for
five years, conditioned upon, among other things, service of 90 days in
county jail. The court imposed $200
restitution fines in accordance with Penal Code sections 1202.4 and
1202.44, a $30 conviction assessment, a $40 court security fee, and a
$4 emergency medical air transportation fee. The court later imposed probation supervision
costs of $1,320, payable at $22 per month.
On April 1, 2011, defendant
displayed a knife and pointed it at a 14-year-old girl who was “2 and a half to 3 feet” away. The girl’s father pushed defendant away, and
defendant made verbal threats as he ran off.
Appointed counsel
for defendant filed an opening brief
that sets forth the facts of the case and asks us to determine whether
there are any arguable issues on appeal.
(Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d
436.) Counsel advised defendant of the
right to file a supplemental brief
within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed and we
have received no communication from defendant.
We have undertaken an examination of the entire record and find no
arguable issues that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
The judgment is
affirmed.
MURRAY , J.
We concur:
NICHOLSON , Acting P. J.
HULL , J.
name="_ftn1" title="">[1] On August 30,
2011, the court modified probation from formal to informal.
