Opinion
F061689 Super. Ct. No. BF133602A
11-04-2011
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JAMES SANTIAGO ESPINOZA, Defendant and Appellant.
Michael Allen, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
OPINION
THE COURT
Before Wiseman, Acting P.J., Levy, J., and Franson. J.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. John S. Somers, Judge.
Michael Allen, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Appellant, James Santiago Espinoza, appeals from a judgment entered after he pled no contest to driving under the influence with a specified prior conviction (count 1/Veh. Code, §§ 23152, subd. (a) & 23550.5), driving with a blood alcohol content greater than .08 percent with a specified prior conviction (count 2/Veh. Code, §§ 23152, subd. (b) & 23550.5), and driving while his driving privilege was suspended for driving under the influence (count 3/Veh. Code, § 14601.2, subd. (a)). Espinoza also admitted a prior conviction enhancement in count 3 (Veh. Code, § 14601.2, subd. (d)(2)) and a prior prison term enhancement (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). Following independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441, we affirm.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
--------
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On August 20, 2010, at approximately 10:55 p.m., California Highway Patrol Officer Jeffrey Packebush responded to the intersection of Water Street and Baker Street in Kern County where a sheriff's deputy had stopped a vehicle driven by Espinoza. The deputy informed Packebush that he stopped Espinoza after seeing him make a wide right turn and travel westbound in an eastbound traffic lane.
Officer Packebush observed that Espinoza's eyes were red and watery, his speech was slurred, he had an odor of alcohol about him, and his ability to walk was impaired. A subsequent blood test disclosed that Espinoza had a .09 percent blood alcohol content.
On September 30, 2010, the district attorney filed an information charging Espinoza with the three counts and enhancements.
On November 23, 2010, appellant entered his plea in this matter in exchange for a lid of two years.
On December 28, 2010, Espinoza failed to appear for his sentencing hearing.
On January 6, 2011, the court sentenced Espinoza to a two-year term, the middle term of two years on count 1, a stayed term on count 2, and a concurrent term of 30 days on count 3. The court also struck the prior prison term enhancement in furtherance of justice pursuant to section 1385.
Espinoza's appellate counsel has filed a brief which summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Espinoza has not responded to this court's invitation to submit additional briefing.
Following an independent review of the record, we find that no reasonably arguable factual or legal issues exist.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.