P. v. Fernandez
Filed 6/7/13 P. v. Fernandez CA6
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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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
SIXTH
APPELLATE DISTRICT
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and
Respondent,
v.
MARIO NOLASCO FERNANDEZ,
Defendant and
Appellant.
H038848
(Santa Clara
County
Super. Ct. No. 151233)
Mario Nolasco Fernandez appeals
from an order extending his commitment as a
14, 2012, the Santa Clara County District Attorney filed a petition
pursuant to Penal Code section 2970, requesting a one-year extension of
appellant’s involuntary commitment to Napa
State Hospital
where appellant resides. According to
the petition, appellant was convicted of a violation of Penal Code section 288
subdivision (a) in 1991 and served a three year prison term. He did not do well on parole. On May
20, 1997, he was admitted to Atastadero
State Hospital
as a mentally disordered offender pursuant to Penal Code section 2962. The petition also alleged that appellant
suffered from a severe mental disorder that was not in remission and could not
be kept in remission without continued confinement. The appellant was not
present at any court proceeding until his trial date. Appellant’s counsel waived a jury trial on
his behalf and the matter was set for court trial. At trial, the court heard testimony from appellant’s
psychiatrist, Dr. Eyerman. The doctor
testified that appellant suffers from schizophrenia and remains a danger to
others. The court found the petition
true, and ordered appellant’s commitment extended. This timely notice of appeal ensued.
On appeal, we appointed
court. Appointed counsel filed an
opening brief which states the case and the facts bur raises no specific
issues. (Conservatorship of Ben C. (2007) 40 Cal.4th 529, 543-544 (
own behalf within 30 days. Thirty days
have elapsed and we have received nothing from the appellant.
The appellant having failed to
raise any issue on appeal, we dismiss the appeal as abandoned. (Ben C.,
supra, 40 Cal.4th 529.)
Disposition
The appeal is dismissed as
abandoned.
_____________________________________
rushing, P.J.
WE CONCUR:
_________________________________
PREMO, J.
_________________________________
ELIA, J.
Although we will not retain this appeal, we note that the record here is
not entirely clear as to whether defendant was advised of his right to a jury
trial and the circumstances of his attorney’s waiver of that right on his
behalf. (People v. Blackburn (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 809.)
