From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Maldonado

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division
Sep 15, 2008
No. E045285 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 15, 2008)

Opinion

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County No. FCH700468, Douglas M. Elwell, Judge.

James R. Bostwick, Jr., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


OPINION

RAMIREZ P.J.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Defendant, Antoinette Maldonado, was charged in a felony complaint with one count of aggravated battery by gassing upon a peace officer (Pen. Code, § 4501.1, subd. (a)). Defendant plead not guilty at her arraignment on October 25, 2007. At the pre-preliminary hearing conference on November 6, 2007 the court declared a doubt as to defendant’s mental competence (§ 1368). The trial court suspended the criminal proceedings and ordered a medical report. On January 17, 2008, the district attorney and defendant’s counsel stipulated to the doctor’s report. The trial court found that defendant was competent to proceed to trial and ordered criminal proceedings reinstated.

All further references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.

Thereafter, pursuant to section 859a, defendant, represented by counsel, pled nolo contendere to a violation of section 4501.1, subdivision (a) as charged in count one of the felony complaint. In accordance with the negotiated disposition it was agreed that defendant would receive a consecutive two year state prison sentence.

On February 25, 2008 defendant filed a notice of appeal. On March 17, 2008 an amended notice of appeal that had been executed on March 13, 2008 was filed.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The record contains no information about the facts of the offense. Counsel for the People and the defendant both stipulated that the incident reports contained an adequate factual basis for defendant’s plea of guilty.

Defendant appealed, and upon her request this court appointed counsel to represent her. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493] setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record.

We offered the defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which she has not done.

We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: McKINSTER J., MILLER J.


Summaries of

People v. Maldonado

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division
Sep 15, 2008
No. E045285 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 15, 2008)
Case details for

People v. Maldonado

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ANTOINETTE MALDONADO, Defendant…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division

Date published: Sep 15, 2008

Citations

No. E045285 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 15, 2008)