People v. Jimenez

Full title: THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JENNIFER J. JIMENEZ, Defendant…

Court: COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

Date published: Jan 9, 2019

H045604 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 9, 2019)

Opinion

H045604

01-09-2019

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JENNIFER J. JIMENEZ, Defendant and Appellant.

Mihara, J.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. C1772631)

Defendant Jennifer J. Jimenez stole and cashed a money order belonging to Paulita Jimenez. She also made unauthorized charges on Jennifer Andrea Jimenez's store credit card accounts.

Defendant was charged by felony complaint with two counts of acquiring personal identifying information with the intent to defraud after suffering a prior conviction (Pen. Code, § 530.5, subd. (c)(2)). She entered into a plea agreement under which she agreed to plead no contest to one count in exchange for an agreed sentence of probation conditioned on one year in jail "NERP" and dismissal of the other count.¹ The plea agreement also included defendant's admission to a probation violation in a separate case and her stipulation that the court could impose restitution for the dismissed count.

1 NERP apparently means "no early release programs." --------

The court accepted the plea agreement, suspended imposition of sentence, granted probation as agreed, imposed numerous probation conditions, and ordered defendant to pay restitution to both victims. Defendant's original timely notice of appeal sought a certificate of probable cause and sought to challenge the validity of her plea. After the superior court denied her request for a certificate, she filed an amended notice of appeal challenging only her sentence.

Appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which states the case and the facts but raises no issues. Defendant was notified of her right to submit written argument on her own behalf but has failed to avail herself of the opportunity. Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we have reviewed the entire record and have concluded that there are no arguable issues on appeal.

The order of probation is affirmed.

/s/_________

Mihara, J. WE CONCUR: /s/_________
Elia, Acting P. J. /s/_________
Grover, J.