P. v. Helms
Filed 1/28/14 P. v. Helms CA4/1
>NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN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 This opinion has not been
certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
KATHLEEN ANN HELMS,
Defendant and Appellant.
D063900
(Super. Ct. No.
SCD242367)
APPEAL
from a judgment of the Superior Court of
San Diego County, Howard H. Shore, Judge. Affirmed.
Cannon
& Harris, Donna L. Harris, for Defendant and Appellant.
No
appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
I.
INTRODUCTION
Kathleen Ann Helms
pled guilty to four counts of conspiring with another to treat the sick and
afflicted without a license, in violation of Business & href="http://www.sandiegohealthdirectory.com/">Professions Code section 2052, subdivision (b). The trial court sentenced Helms to a total
term of three years, and ordered Helms to pay approximately $67,500 in
restitution to four victims. We affirm
the judgment.
II.
FACTUAL
AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
By amended
felony complaint the San Diego County
District Attorney charged Helms with multiple
counts of treating the sick and afflicted without a license (Bus. & Prof.
Code, § 2052, subd. (a); counts 1, 2, 7, 8, 17, & 18), multiple counts of
conspiring with another to treat the sick and afflicted without a license (Bus.
& Prof. Code, § 2052, subd. (b); counts 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, & 12-16), and
two counts of grand theft of personal property (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (a);
counts 6 and 11). The href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.us/">complaint further alleged that Helms
personally inflicted great bodily
injury on one of the victims, in connection with count 5.
Helms waived her
right to a jury trial and pled guilty to counts 3, 9, 12 and 16. In exchange for Helms's guilty plea, the
People agreed to a stipulated three-year sentence, of which Helms was to serve 18
months in custody and 18 months under mandatory supervision pursuant to Penal
Code section 1179, subdivision (h)(5)(B), and dismissal of the remaining
charges.
As the factual
basis for her guilty plea, Helms admitted that she unlawfully practiced medical
care to others without possessing a valid California license
to practice medicine.
The trial court
denied probation and ordered Helms committed to the custody of the sheriff's department
for an aggregate term of three years.
The court ordered Helms to serve 18 months in custody, and the remaining
18 months of her term under the mandatory supervision of the probation
department. In addition to ordering
Helms to pay mandatory fines and fees, the court ordered Helms to pay victim
restitution in the following amounts: $19,257.35 to Julie Hinze, $15,000 to
Michael Altschul, $5,535 to Jeremy McLaughlin as trustee for Richard Rebuffattee,
and $26,755.67 to Gina Endicott.
Helms filed a
timely notice of appeal.
Helms's
appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to People
v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).
We invited Helms to file a brief on her own behalf, but she has not responded.
III.
DISCUSSION
Helms's counsel
presents no argument for reversal, but asks this court to review the record for
error, as mandated by Wende, >supra, 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel lists the following as possible, but not arguable,
issues:
(1) "Whether the trial court erred
by ordering appellant to pay restitution to Gina Endicott who was not a named
victim in the felony complaint filed against appellant";
(2) "Whether appellant was
entitled to notice and a hearing before the trial court ordered $15,000 seized
from appellant be released to the victims as payments toward the restitution
ordered by the court"; and
(3) "Whether the trial court
abused its discretion by denying appellant's motion to return a colloidal
silver machine and a supply of a drug known as Regenersen."
A review of the
record pursuant to Wende, >supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and >Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738, including the possible issues listed pursuant to >Anders, has disclosed no reasonably
arguable appellate issues. Helms has
been competently represented by counsel in this appeal.
IV.
DISPOSITION
The
judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
AARON, J.
WE CONCUR:
BENKE,
Acting P. J.
HUFFMAN,
J.


