Opinion
A151010
11-30-2017
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LARRY L. GUIMOND, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (City & County San Francisco Super. Ct. No. 226423)
Counsel for defendant Larry L. Guimond has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 asking this court to make an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any colorable issues in the disposition made by the trial court following defendant's guilty plea to a violation of Penal Code section 368, subdivision (b)(1), infliction of injury on an elder adult with force likely to cause great bodily injury. We have done so, noting that defendant has been notified of his right to file a supplemental brief and has failed to do so, and find no issues warranting further briefing or consideration. We shall therefore affirm the judgment.
All statutory references are to the Penal Code. --------
Defendant was charged in a three-count information with offenses arising out of an incident in which, while apparently under the influence of drugs, he struck and injured an elderly victim. Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant pleaded guilty to the violation of section 368, subdivision (b)(1), the other counts and enhancements were dismissed and the court suspended imposition of sentence. Defendant was placed on three years of supervised probation (subject to possible early discharge after two years), the court finding as the probation department recommended that there were unusual circumstances overcoming the presumption of defendant's probation ineligibility under section 1203, subdivision (e)(4). Probation is subject to numerous conditions, including service of 401 days in jail satisfied by time served, compliance with an individualized treatment and rehabilitation plan, and payment of various fines and penalties subject to defendant's ability to pay.
Defendant's appeal is taken from matters occurring after entry of his plea. The court's order was in accord with defendant's plea agreement and our review of the record discloses no colorable basis for overturning the order.
The judgment is affirmed.
Pollak, Acting P.J. We concur: Siggins, J.
Jenkins, J.