Opinion
C099889
09-12-2024
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOSEPH ROBERT HENDRIX, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
(Super. Ct. No. 22CF01104)
HULL, ACTING P. J.
Appointed counsel for defendant Joseph Robert Hendrix asked this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We affirm the judgment.
Facts and History of the Proceedings
On February 16, 2022, defendant was driving his car at about 80 miles per hour when he crashed into another car, killing the driver. A subsequent blood test revealed methamphetamine in defendant's blood. The People charged defendant with gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated (Pen. Code, § 191.5, subd. (a)). The People alleged this was defendant's third strike offense (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(j), 1170.12), and alleged he had a prior serious felony conviction (Pen. Code, § 667, subd. (a)(1)).
Defendant pleaded no contest to the felony charge, admitted he was previously convicted of a strike offense, and agreed to be sentenced to the upper term of 10 years, doubled for the prior strike. In exchange for his plea, the People moved to strike the remaining allegations. The trial court struck the remaining allegations and sentenced defendant to the stipulated term of 20 years in state prison. The court ordered defendant to pay mandatory fines and fees, as well as restitution. The court also awarded defendant 1,249 days of custody credit.
Defendant appeals from the judgment without a certificate of probable cause. While his appeal was pending, defendant submitted a letter to the trial court seeking a correction in the calculation of his custody credits pursuant to People v. Fares (1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 954. The trial court corrected the error and issued a corrected abstract of judgment reflecting a total of 1,261 days of custody credits.
Discussion
Appointed counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and asking 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 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.
We concur: MAURO, J. FEINBERG, J.