Opinion
C082677
01-25-2018
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. GARRETT ALEXANDER BERRY, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. Nos. CM043630, SCR103563)
This appeal comes to us pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.
On September 23, 2015, a complaint was filed charging defendant Garrett Alexander Berry with receiving stolen property with a value exceeding $950 (count 1; Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a) [statutory section references that follow are to the Penal Code]) and misdemeanor exhibiting a firearm (count 2; § 417, subd. (a)(2)).
On October 21, 2015, defendant entered pleas of no contest to both counts. According to the probation report, stipulated as the factual basis for his plea, on the night of September 19, 2015, police officers were sent to an apartment complex to respond to a report of a man brandishing a firearm. They found defendant with a woman who turned out to be his mother. After the two were taken into custody, defendant's mother admitted defendant had been in possession of a firearm and directed the officers to where the firearm was hidden. The officers found a loaded .45 semiautomatic handgun, which turned out to be stolen. Later, the boyfriend of defendant's mother told the officers that defendant had come to the apartment, started arguing with him, pulled a gun out of his waistband, pointed it, and cocked it.
After attempting unsuccessfully to withdraw his plea, defendant received a grant of three years' formal probation (with imposition of sentence suspended for that time), including 180 days in jail with credit for 180 days served, and six months concurrent on the misdemeanor. As to count 1, the court imposed an $850 fine (a $200 base fine pursuant to § 672, plus penalties and assessments as enumerated in the probation report); as to count 2, the court imposed a $300 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)), a matching suspended probation revocation fine (§ 1202.44), a $30 conviction assessment fee (Gov. Code, § 70373), and a $40 court operations assessment (§ 1465.8). The court reserved jurisdiction over victim restitution.
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
HULL, J. We concur: BLEASE, Acting P. J. BUTZ, J.