From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Edmund

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO
Jan 30, 2020
E073864 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 30, 2020)

Opinion

E073864

01-30-2020

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. NICOL CLYDE EDMUND, Defendant and Appellant.

Marilee Marshall, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super.Ct.No. INF048115) OPINION APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Dean Benjamini, Judge. Affirmed. Marilee Marshall, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Defendant and appellant, Nicol Clyde Edmund, filed a "motion to vacate and correct illegal sentence," which the superior court denied. After defendant filed a notice of appeal, this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, setting forth a statement of the case and one potentially arguable issue: whether imposition of a $3,600 restitution fine was lawful. We affirm.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On January 17, 2008, the People filed a felony information charging defendant with assault with a deadly weapon by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury upon a peace officer (Pen. Code § 245, subd. (c), count 1) and misdemeanor false representation to a peace officer (§ 148.9, subd. (a), count 2). The People additionally alleged defendant had personally inflicted great bodily injury in his commission of the count 1 offense (§§ 12022.7, subd. (a) & 1192.7, subd. (c)(8)) and had suffered two prior strike convictions (§§ 667, subds. (c) & (e)(1) & 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)), two prior serious felony convictions (§ 667, subd. (a)), and had served two prior prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (b)).

All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

On May 6, 2009, a jury found defendant guilty of counts 1 and 2, and additionally found true the allegation defendant had personally inflicted great bodily injury in the commission of count 1. The court thereafter found true the prior prison term and prior conviction enhancements. The court sentenced defendant to an aggregate term of 18 years in state prison. The court ordered a $3,600 parole revocation fine pursuant to section 1202.45, subdivision (b), which the court suspended unless defendant had any future parole revoked.

The court stayed imposition of punishment on one of the prior prison term enhancements, and struck one of defendant's prior strike convictions, one prior prison term enhancement, and one of the prior serious felony conviction enhancements. --------

Defendant filed a "motion to vacate and correct illegal sentence" arguing that the sentencing court's imposition of a $3,600 restitution fine pursuant to section 1202.45 was unlawful. Defendant maintained that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation had already collected close to $1,000 of the fine from his account over several years. The court denied the motion noting that defendant had forfeited any error by failing to object at sentencing.

II. DISCUSSION

We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done. Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have independently reviewed the record for potential error and find no arguable issues.

III. DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

McKINSTER

J. We concur: RAMIREZ

P. J. MENETREZ

J.


Summaries of

People v. Edmund

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO
Jan 30, 2020
E073864 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 30, 2020)
Case details for

People v. Edmund

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. NICOL CLYDE EDMUND, Defendant and…

Court:COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO

Date published: Jan 30, 2020

Citations

E073864 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 30, 2020)