Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Alameda County Super. Ct. No. H30242C1
SIMONS, J.
Defendant Mauricio Picado appeals the sentence imposed after this court remanded the matter for resentencing in light of Cunningham v. California (2007) 549 U.S. 270. Defendant’s counsel advises this court that his examination of the record reveals no arguable issues. (Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Counsel has advised his client in writing that a Wende brief was filed and that defendant had the right to personally file a supplemental brief in this case within 30 days. No such brief was filed. We agree there are no arguable issues and affirm.
BACKGROUND
In 2003 defendant was convicted by jury trial of five counts of assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1) , two counts of simple assault (§ 240), two counts of brandishing a weapon (§ 417), and one count of battery (§ 242). The jury found the offenses were gang-related activity. (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1).) In relevant part, the trial court selected count 3, assault with a deadly weapon, as the principal term and imposed the upper term on that count as well as on the related gang enhancement. Defendant appealed, arguing that those upper terms violated the Sixth Amendment under Cunningham. We remanded the matter for resentencing in light of Cunningham.
All undesignated section references are to the Penal Code.
Defendant was resentenced on December 9, 2008. The prosecutor and defense counsel stipulated that defendant would be sentenced to the three-year midterm on the count 3 assault with a deadly weapon conviction and the three-year midterm on the related gang enhancement, thus modifying his total prison term from 16 years to 14 years. An abstract of judgment was prepared reflecting the modified sentence.
Defendant was adequately represented at all stages of the proceedings and there are no arguable issues.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur. JONES, P.J., NEEDHAM, J.