People v. Lara

Full title: THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ERICK LARA, Defendant and…

Court: California Court of Appeals, Third District, Butte

Date published: Oct 23, 2007

No. C055029 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 23, 2007)

Opinion

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ERICK LARA, Defendant and Appellant. C055029 California Court of Appeal, Third District, Butte October 23, 2007

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Super. Ct. No. CM020826

DAVIS, J.

In March 2004, defendant Erick Lara approached a plainclothes peace officer in his car, flashed a gang sign, said “Norteño,” and used the closed fist of his right hand to strike the officer on his left eye.¹ Defendant appeared to be intoxicated.

1 Because defendant pleaded no contest, our statement of facts is taken from the probation officer’s report and the transcript of the preliminary hearing.

Defendant pleaded no contest to resisting an executive officer. (Pen. Code, § 69.)² The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on probation for three years on the conditions, among others, that he serve 120 days of incarceration and report to the probation officer as required.

2 Hereafter, undesignated section references are to the Penal Code.

In February 2006, a petition was filed alleging that defendant violated his probation by failing to report to the probation officer as directed. Defendant admitted the violation. He entered a Johnson waiver³ as to 73 days of presentence credit. Probation was reinstated.

3 People v. Johnson (1978) 82 Cal.App.3d 183, 188; see People v. Johnson (2002) 28 Cal.4th 1050, 1052, 1054-1055.)

In October 2006, a petition was filed alleging that defendant violated his probation by again failing to report to probation and by being terminated from an anger management program. Defendant admitted the first allegation, and the second allegation was dismissed with a Harvey waiver.⁴

4 People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754.

Defendant was sentenced to state prison for two years, awarded 25 days of custody credit and 12 days of conduct credit, and ordered to pay a $200 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)), a $200 restitution fine suspended unless parole is revoked (§ 1202.45), and a $20 court security fee (§ 1465.8).

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 have elapsed, and we have received no communication from defendant.

Our review discloses a minor error on the abstract of judgment. The $20 court security fee is erroneously listed as $40. We shall direct that the abstract be corrected accordingly.

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 abstract of judgment to reflect a $20 court security fee, and to forward a certified copy of the corrected abstract to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

We concur: BLEASE, Acting P.J., NICHOLSON, J.