Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Super. Ct. No. 05F2459
DAVIS , J.
Some time between October 24, 1989, and October 24, 1990, defendant Timothy Lee Gallant showered with his five-year-old stepdaughter. While washing her, he rubbed her clitoris and penetrated her vagina with his finger. Some time between October 24, 1991, and October 24, 1992, she awoke from sleep to find him rubbing her vagina as he masturbated himself. The offenses came to light when her aunt reported them to law enforcement in 2004.
Because defendant pleaded guilty, our statement of facts is taken from the probation officer’s report.
In February 2006, defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of lewd and lascivious acts with a child under age 14 (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a)) and admitted an allegation that the offenses were within the provisions of section 803, former subdivision (g) (now subdivision (f)(1)). In exchange, a third count of the same offense was dismissed.
Hereafter, undesignated section references are to the Penal Code.
Defendant was sentenced to state prison for eight years, awarded 114 days of custody credit and 56 days of conduct credit, and ordered to pay a $1,600 restitution fine. (§ 1202.4, subd. (b).)
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 (1979) 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.
Our review of the record discloses two minor errors on the January 23, 2007, amended abstract of judgment. First, defendant’s middle name is misspelled--his name is listed as Timothy “Le” Gallant; it should be Timothy “Lee” Gallant. Second, the November 17, 2006, minute order reflects that a section 1202.45 restitution fine was stricken for the evident reason that the statute was not in effect at the time of defendant’s offenses. However, the minute order does not purport to alter the $1,600 restitution fine imposed pursuant to section 1202.4, subdivision (b). Thus, the fine imposed pursuant to section 1202.4, subdivision (b) must be included on the amended abstract.
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. The trial court is directed to correct the amended abstract of judgment to list defendant’s name as “Timothy Lee” Gallant” and to include the section 1202.4, subdivision (b) restitution fine and to forward a certified copy of the corrected abstract to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
We concur: BLEASE , Acting P.J., MORRISON , J.