P. v. Smith
Filed 3/5/12 P. v. Smith CA2/1
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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115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
FIVE
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
CRYSTAL FAYE SMITH,
Defendant and Appellant.
B232849
(Los Angeles
County
Super. Ct.
No. MA050499)
APPEAL from
a judgment of the Superior Court
of
County, Christopher G. Estes, Judge. Affirmed.
Richard B.
Lennon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No
appearance on behalf of Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant, Crystal Faye Smith, appeals from a judgment
after she pled no contest to one count of child
abuse (Pen. Code,
name="_ftnref1" title="">[1] § 273a, subd. (a))
and that in committing the child abuse she inflicted great bodily injury on
S.G., who was under the age of five years (§ 12022.7, subd. (d)). Charges defendant had committed mayhem
(§ 203) and torture (§ 206) were dismissed as part of the plea
negotiation.
Defendant
was sentenced to a total of six years which consisted of the lower term of two
years for the child abuse charge and four years for the infliction of great
bodily injury allegation. Defendant was
given a total of 185 days of presentence custody credit consisting of l61 days
of actual custody plus 24 days of conduct credit. Defendant was ordered to pay: a restitution fine of $1,200 (§ 1202.4,
subd. (b)(1)); a $1,200 parole revocation fine (§ 1202.45); a $40 court
security assessment fee (§ 1465.8, subd. (a)(1); and a $30 criminal
conviction fee (Gov. Code, § 70373, subd. (a)(1)).
Because
defendant pled no contest after waiving her
following facts are taken from the probation report. Defendant was the caretaker of S.G., a
21-month-old toddler. The toddler had
been removed by social services from her parents’ custody. Defendant submerged the toddler’s hands and
feet in scalding hot water. Defendant
then failed to seek immediate medical attention for the child. Defendant allowed the child to suffer for
several hours. The child suffered second
and third degree burns that will require several
and possible mobility and functionality impairment.
On July 25, 2011, we issued an order to
show cause re dismissal on the grounds defendant had not obtained a probable
cause certificate and had failed to comply with California Rules of Court, rule
8.304(b). On January 17, 2012, we granted defendant’s motion
to amend the notice of appeal to state that the appeal was from matters
occurring after the plea, which did not affect its validity.
We
appointed counsel to represent
defendant on appeal. After examination
of the record, counsel filed an “Opening Brief” in which no issues were
raised. Instead, counsel requested this
court independently review the entire record on appeal pursuant to
441. On January 27, 2012, we advised defendant that she had 30
days within which to personally submit any contentions or arguments she wishes
us to consider. No response has been
received.
We have
examined the entire record and are satisfied appointed appellate counsel has
fully complied with his responsibilities.
No argument exists favorable to defendant in the appeal. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259,
277-284; People v.
Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 112-113; People v. Wende, supra, 25
Cal.3d at p. 441.) The judgment is
affirmed.
NOT
TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
TURNER,
P. J.
We concur:
ARMSTRONG,
J.
MOSK, J.
unless otherwise indicated.
