Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Super. Ct. No. F04347
SCOTLAND, P.J.
Defendant Michael Elliott Papac molested his eight-year-old child in late September 2003. He entered a negotiated plea of guilty to lewd and lascivious conduct with a child under 14 years of age. (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a).) The court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on probation. As a condition of probation, defendant was ordered to serve 399 days in county jail, with credit for time served.
Defendant subsequently admitted to violating his probation by being convicted of misdemeanor assault and resisting arrest in Medford, Oregon. The court imposed a sentence of six years in prison, ordered various fines, and awarded 555 days of credit (483 days time served and 72 days conduct).
Defendant appeals. We appointed counsel to represent him on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks us 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 elapsed, and we 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. Although there were several errors in the abstract of judgment, they were corrected by the trial court in an amended abstract of judgment that was filed on October 19, 2007.
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: BLEASE, J. HULL, J.