Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior court of Los Angeles County No. PA060580. Cynthia L. Ulfig, Judge.
Murray A. Rosenberg, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
CHANEY, J.
Paul Ortega was charged with attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a) and 664; all statutory references are to the Penal Code), assault with a firearm (§ 245, subd. (a)(2)), and possession of a firearm by a felon (§ 12021, subd. (a)(1)). It was further alleged he personally used a firearm (§§ 12022.5 and 12022.53, subd. (b)) and intentionally discharged a firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (c)). As established at the preliminary hearing, the charges arose from an incident that occurred on November 30, 2007, when Ortega shot at his apartment manager, Marvin Ramos, approximately four times with a handgun, apparently over a long running dispute about apartment complex rules.
Defendant entered a negotiated plea of no contest to assault with a firearm and admitted to personally using a firearm within the meaning of § 12022.5. In exchange for the plea, he was sentenced to a total term of seven years in state prison. The sentence comprised the high term of four years for the assault plus the low term of three years for the firearm use. Pursuant to subdivision (c) of section 2933.1, defendant was limited to conduct credits in the amount of 15% of actual time in custody (565 days), or 84 days conduct credit. He nevertheless received conduct credit for 25% of the days of actual custody, calculated as follows: 565 days actual custody plus 141 days conduct credit, for a total custody credit of 706 days.
Defendant filed a timely appeal and we appointed counsel to represent him. After examination of the record, appointed counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues and asking this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441-442.) On December 10, 2009 we sent letters to defendant and to appointed counsel, directing counsel to immediately forward the appellate record to defendant and notifying defendant that within 30 days he could personally submit any contentions or issues that he wished us to consider. To date, defendant has not responded.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that defendant’s appointed counsel has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 109-110; People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)
We note the inapplicability of amendments to section 4019 that took effect on January 25, 2010. Section 4019 was amended to permit the award of increased conduct credit in some cases, but not when a prisoner is “committed for a serious felony, as defined in Section 1192.7” (§ 4019, subds. (b)(2), (c)(2).) Defendant was convicted for a serious felony (assault with a firearm) within the meaning of section 1192.7. (§ 1192.7, subd. (c) [serious felony is “(24) any felony in which the defendant personally used a dangerous or deadly weapon.”].)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: ROTHSCHILD, Acting P. J., JOHNSON, J.