Opinion
C099689
08-12-2024
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SUMMER BRANDY ARNOLD, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
(Super. Ct. No. 21CR16139)
BOULWARE EURIE, J.
Appointed counsel for defendant Summer Brandy Arnold has asked this court to conduct an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to Arnold, we will affirm the judgment.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In May 2021, Arnold was under the influence of methamphetamine while caring for her infant daughter. She pled guilty to a count of misdemeanor endangering a child likely to cause great bodily harm or death. (Pen. Code, § 273a, subd. (a).) The trial court granted Arnold four years of formal probation.
The parties stipulated to the factual basis for the plea, but our record on appeal does not include that factual basis. Since the facts of the underlying conviction are not at issue on this appeal, they are taken from the summary of the police report.
In May 2022, the probation officer filed two petitions for revocation of probation. Arnold admitted these two violations of probation on February 1, 2023. Between June 5, 2023, and August 23, 2023, the probation officer filed five more petitions for revocation of probation. Arnold admitted all five violations of probation on September 6, 2023. The trial court revoked probation and ordered Arnold to serve 364 days in county jail, with 73 days of presentence custody credits. Subsequent to sentencing, the trial court granted a motion to modify credits to reflect 113 days of presentence custody credits.
DISCUSSION
Arnold's appointed counsel has asked this court to conduct an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Arnold was advised by counsel of her right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days from the date the opening brief was filed. We have not received any communication from Arnold. We have undertaken an examination of the record and conclude there is no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to Arnold.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: ROBIE, Acting P. J., MESIWALA, J.