P. v. Griffin
Irin Vernal Griffin appeals from the judgment following his conviction of one count of corporal injury to a co habitant. (Pen. Code, 273.5, subd. (a).) Court appointed counsel to represent appellant in this matter. After examining the record, counsel filed a Wende brief raising no issues on appeal and requesting that we independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We directed appointed counsel to immediately send the record on this appeal and a copy of the opening brief to appellant, and notified appellant that within 30 days from the date of the notice he could submit by brief or letter any grounds of appeal, contentions, or argument he wished us to consider. Appellant filed a supplemental brief in which he contends that he received ineffective assistance from his trial counsel and that the trial court committed Crawford error in admitting into evidence statements by the victim to the police and the transcript of the victims preliminary hearing testimony. (Crawford v. Washington (2004) 541 U.S. 36.) Appellant also moved for the appointment of an expert in the field of police practices. (Evid. Code, 730-732; Code Civ. Proc., 909.) We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellants attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.) Court set out below a brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case, the crime of which the defendant was convicted, and the punishment imposed. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110.) Court also briefly explain why we reject the contentions in appellants supplemental brief and deny his motion for appointment of an expert.
Comments on P. v. Griffin