Opinion
A157209
03-16-2020
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. KEVIN LEON HILL, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. 051703628)
This is an appeal from judgment after a jury convicted defendant Kevin Leon Hill of two misdemeanor counts, vandalism (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (a)) and battery on a person with a past or present dating relationship or a child's parent (§ 243, subd. (e)(1)). The jury acquitted defendant of two felony counts, assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)) and making criminal threats (§ 422, subd. (a)). The trial court subsequently placed defendant on probation for three years conditioned on his service of 120 days on electronic home detention (EHD), his participation in a 52-week domestic violence program, and his subjection to a 10-year domestic violence restraining order. The court ordered restitution in an amount to be determined and reserved imposition of fees and fines in light of pending legislative action.
Unless otherwise stated, all statutory citations are to the Penal Code. --------
After defendant filed a timely notice of appeal and appellate counsel was appointed to represent him, his counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) in which he raises no issue for appeal and asks this court for an independent review of the record. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 124 (Kelly).) Counsel attests that defendant was advised of his right to file a supplemental brief in a timely manner, but he has not exercised this right.
We have examined the entire record in accordance with Wende and, for reasons to follow, agree with counsel no arguable issue exists on appeal. Accordingly, we affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
A.B. had "an off and on relationship" with defendant that began in 1993. Together, they had one or more children. On December 8, 2016, A.B. attended a play in the city of Pittsburg with E.T., a male companion. A.B. had falsely told defendant by text message that she would be attending this play with the wife of a family member. When leaving the play and walking with E.T. to her car, defendant approached A.B., hit her repeatedly in the side of the head with his closed fist and called her a "lying, f'ing bitch." According to A.B., "I'm not sure, can't remember, but I believe he pulled a knife out and told me he would cut my—he would cut me, cut my f'ing throat." A.B. was scared and believed he would actually do what he said. She believed defendant then went to her car, told her "you won't be going home tonight," and slashed her tire with a knife before running off. A.B. was left with a laceration on her nose.
Another play attendee, T.H., heard a "kind of a commotion" when walking to his car after the play and saw an argument between a man and a woman, later identified as defendant and A.B., escalate into a "physical altercation . . . ." T.H. saw defendant strike A.B. in the "face, upper body type area" with a closed fist "multiple times[.]" Afterward, T.H. saw defendant walk to A.B.'s car and "slash[]" her tire. T.H. stayed with A.B. until the police arrived, three or four minutes later.
On March 13, 2017, defendant was charged by information with: felony assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)) (count 1), enhanced for personal use of a deadly weapon (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)); felony making criminal threats (§ 422, subd. (a)) (count 2), also enhanced for personal use of a deadly weapon (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)); misdemeanor vandalism under $400 (§ 594, subd. (a)) (count 3); and battery on a person with a past or present dating relationship or child's parent (§ 243, subd. (e)(1)) (count 4).
Trial began on March 5, 2019, after which the jury found defendant guilty of the misdemeanor counts (3 and 4), not guilty of the felony counts (1 and 2), and found not true the enhancement allegations with respect to counts 1 and 2.
On May 3, 2019, defendant was placed on probation for three years, with the conditions that he serve 120 days on EHD, attend a 52-week domestic violence program, and remain subject to a 10-year domestic violence restraining order. The court ordered restitution in an amount to be determined and reserved imposition of fees and fines in light of pending legislative action. This timely appeal followed.
DISCUSSION
As mentioned above, neither appointed counsel nor defendant has identified any issue for our review. Upon our own independent review of the entire record, we agree none exists. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436; Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, 744.) The jury's findings were amply supported by the evidence produced at trial, including the testimony of both A.B. and T.H. describing defendant's closed-fist attack on A.B. and his subsequent slashing of her tire. (See People v. Rodriguez (1999) 20 Cal.4th 1, 11 [" ' " ' "If the circumstances reasonably justify the trier of fact's findings, the opinion of the reviewing court that the circumstances might also reasonably be reconciled with a contrary finding does not warrant a reversal of the judgment" ' " ' "].)
Moreover, the trial court acted within the scope of its discretion when placing defendant on probation for three years with the conditions that he serve 120 days on EHD, participate in a 52-week domestic violence program, and remain subject to a 10-year domestic violence restraining order. (See § 243, subd. (e)(1) ["When a battery is committed against . . . a person with whom the defendant currently has, or has previously had, a dating or engagement relationship, the battery is punishable by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars ($2,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail for a period of not more than one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment. If probation is granted, . . . it shall be a condition thereof that the defendant participate in, for no less than one year, and successfully complete, a batterer's treatment program"]; § 594, subd. (b)(2)(A) ["If the amount of defacement, damage, or destruction is less than four hundred dollars ($400), vandalism is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment"].)
Accordingly, having ensured defendant received adequate and effective appellate review, we affirm the judgment. (Kelly, supra, 40 Cal.4th at pp. 112-113.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
/s/_________
Jackson, J. WE CONCUR: /s/_________
Fujisaki, Acting P. J. /s/_________
Petrou, J.