P. v. Marion

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed 1/30/14  P. v. Marion 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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  This opinion has not been
certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

 

 

 

IN
THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD
APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Amador)

----

 

 

 

 
>

THE PEOPLE,                           Plaintiff and Respondent,               v.   JAMES EDWARD MARION,                           Defendant and Appellant.

C073689   (Super. Ct. No. 12CR19473)

 

 

 

 

            This
appeal comes to us pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (>Wende).

            In
September 2012, by plea agreement, defendant pleaded guilty to felony vandalism
(Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (a))[1] and reckless driving (Veh. Code, § 23103), in return for a
guarantee of five years of probation,
including 180 days in county jail and a three-year sentencing lid if defendant
violated probation.  The factual basis
for the plea was as follows:  On the
afternoon of September 9, 2010, defendant, driving a Chevrolet Blazer on State
Route 88 in Amador County, forced the victim’s car (a Mazda Miata) into
westbound lanes against traffic; then defendant dropped back, got behind the
victim’s car, and moved to its right, again trying to force the victim into the
opposing lane; then defendant got behind the victim’s car, went on the opposing
lane side of the car, drove in front of it, and came into the victim’s lane,
striking the front of the car and causing damages in excess of $400. 

            In
October 2012, the trial court placed defendant on formal probation for five years,
including 180 days in jail.  The court
imposed a $240 restitution fine (§ 1202.4) and a suspended probation revocation
restitution fine in the same amount (§ 12022.44), a $80 court security fee (§ 1465.8), and a $60
criminal conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373, subd. (a)(1)).  After a hearing on victim restitution, the
court awarded restitution in the amount of $4,598.26. 

            We
appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal.  Counsel
filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this
court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues
on appeal.  (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) 
Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within
30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief.  More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no
communication from defendant.  Having
undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that
would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.



 

DISPOSITION

            The
judgment is affirmed.

 

 

 

                                                                                              NICHOLSON              , J.

 

 

 

We concur:

 

 

 

          BLEASE                       , Acting P. J.

 

 

 

          DUARTE                      , J.