P. v. Taranto
Filed 8/29/08 P. v. Taranto CA4/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SCOTT LEE TARANTO, Defendant and Appellant. | E045273 (Super.Ct.No. SWF023477) OPINION |
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. John M. Monterosso, Judge. Affirmed.
Cindi B. Mishkin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
On November 21, 2007, a felony complaint was filed in the Superior Court of Riverside County charging defendant with one count of uttering a criminal threat (Pen. Code, 422) while personally using a firearm (Pen. Code, 12022.5, subd. (a) and 1192.7, subd. (c)(8)) (count 1), one count of possession of a firearm by a felon (Pen. Code, 12021, subd. (a)) (count 2), and one count of resisting, delaying and obstructing a police officer in the discharge of his duties (Pen. Code, 148, subd. (a)(1) (count 3). The complaint further alleged that appellant had served one separate prison prior term (Pen. Code, 667.5, subd. (b)).
On January 7, 2008, defendant, represented by counsel, pled guilty to count one in exchange for the imposition of a three-year prison term, to run concurrent with any parole violation. In accordance with the negotiated disposition, the court ordered defendant to serve a three-year prison sentence, pay $200 in restitution, with an equal but stayed fine under Penal Code section 1202.45, to provide DNA samples, to pay a $20 court security fee, and awarded him 75 days of presentence credits. Victim restitution was left to be determined. Pursuant to the plea agreement and in the interests of justice, the remaining counts and special allegations were dismissed and stricken on motion of the district attorney (Pen. Code, 1385).
statement of facts[1]
On November 18, 2007, defendant criminally threatened the victim with a crime likely to result in death or great bodily injury, so that she reasonably feared for her safety.
Defendant appealed, and upon his request this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493] setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record.
We offered the defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.
We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
disposition
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
RAMIREZ
P.J.
We concur:
McKINSTER
J.
GAUT
J.
Publication courtesy of San Diego pro bono legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Poway Property line attorney.
San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com
[1] Because the plea in this case was taken before the preliminary hearing, and thus before any adjudication of facts, this factual statement is taken from defendants statements at his guilty plea, which the court accepted as the factual basis for it, and from the plea form and felony complaint.
