Opinion
C073939
10-30-2013
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ERIC CHRISTOPHER BOWEN, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. No. CRF111257)
Appointed counsel for defendant Eric Christopher Bowen has asked this court to review the record to determine whether there exist any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment.
We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)
BACKGROUND
In February 2011, then 11-year-old C.T. told her mother that defendant had been sexually assaulting her. C.T. reported defendant had made her orally copulate him and forced her to have anal sex. The sexual assaults started when C.T. was five years old.
An information charged defendant with sodomy of a child 10 years old or younger (Pen. Code, § 288.7, subd. (a); undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code), oral copulation with a child 10 years old or younger (§ 288.7, subd. (b)), and lewd and lascivious conduct with a child under the age of 14 years old (§ 288, subd. (a)). Defendant pleaded no contest to lewd and lascivious conduct with a child. In exchange for the plea, the trial court granted defendant probation.
In the ensuing year, the trial court found defendant violated his probation twice. After the second violation, the trial court denied further probation and sentenced defendant to a term of eight years in state prison and awarded 533 days of presentence credits. Defendant did not obtain a certificate of probable cause. (§ 1273.5.)
DISCUSSION
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. (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 have elapsed, and we have 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. MURRAY, J.