P. v. Anderson-Boyko
Filed 6/25/12 P. v. Anderson-Boyko 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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.
LETICIA MARIA
ANDERSON-BOYKO,
Defendant and Appellant.
E054816
(Super.Ct.No. RIF10002802)
OPINION
APPEAL
from the Superior Court of
County. John D. Molloy,
Judge. Affirmed.
Russell
S. Babcock, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
No
appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
INTRODUCTION
On
June 18, 2010,
a felony complaint charged defendant and appellant Leticia Maria Anderson-Boyko
with theft under Penal Code
name="_ftnref1" title="">[1] sections 484, subdivision (a) and 666. On September 2, 2011, the complaint was orally amended to add a
count of second degree burglary under section 459. Thereafter, defendant pled guilty to the
charge of second degree burglary, in
exchange for a stipulated low term to be served concurrently to any other
commitment. Moreover, count 1 for felony
theft was dismissed in the interest of justice under section 1385.
The
trial court sentenced defendant immediately following the plea. The court imposed the stipulated low term of
16 months. Defendant received credit for
actual time served of 200 days, and conduct credit of 200 days, for a total of
400 days. The court then ordered
defendant to pay a restitution fine of $200 under section 1202.4, subdivision
(b), and a matching parole revocation fine of the same amount, stayed under
section 1202.45. The trial court also
ordered security and booking fees, and a criminal conviction assessment
fee. The court, however, found that
defendant did not have the ability to repay the county for attorney fees.
On
October 20, 2011, defendant filed a timely notice
of appeal. She requested a
certificate of probable cause, which was granted.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
In
pleading guilty to the charge of burglary, defendant admitted that on May 30,
2010, she entered a
building on Canyon Crest Drive in Riverside, with the intent to commit a felony or
steal.
ANALYSIS
After defendant appealed, and
upon her request, this court appointed counsel to represent her. 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 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 defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, but she
has not done so. Pursuant to the mandate
of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th
106, we have conducted an independent review of the record and find no
DISPOSITION
The
judgment is affirmed.
NOT
TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
MCKINSTER
J.
We concur:
RAMIREZ
P.J.
KING
J.
name="_ftn1" title=""> [1] All statutory references are to the Penal Code
unless otherwise specified.
