Opinion
B231178
12-14-2011
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LEONEL RIVAS, Defendant and Appellant.
David R. Greifinger, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
(Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA377402)
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Rand S. Rubin, Judge. Affirmed.
David R. Greifinger, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
INTRODUCTION
Defendant Leonel Rivas appeals from the judgment entered following his conviction by a jury of aggravated assault. No meritorious issues have been identified following a review of the record by defendant's appointed counsel and our own independent review of the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.) We affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Defendant was barred from entering a restaurant by Walter Martinez (Martinez), a restaurant security guard. Within 30 minutes, defendant returned brandishing a screwdriver and threatening Martinez. Another security guard grabbed defendant from behind and Martinez pepper-sprayed him. Defendant dropped the screwdriver. Police arrested defendant and recovered the screwdriver at the scene.
Defendant was charged by information with one count of assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)). Defendant entered a plea of not guilty.
At trial, defendant testified in his own defense that Martinez was the aggressor. Defendant denied having a screwdriver and claimed that Martinez pepper-sprayed and punched him when defendant attempted to enter the restaurant to retrieve his jacket.
The jury convicted defendant as charged.
At sentencing, the trial court imposed the middle term of three years in state prison for assault with a deadly weapon. The court ordered defendant to pay a $40 court security fee, a $30 criminal conviction assessment, and a $600 restitution fine. The court imposed and suspended a parole revocation fine pursuant to Penal Code section 1202.45. Defendant was awarded 245 days presentence credit (123 actual days and 122 days of conduct credit).
Defendant timely filed a notice of appeal.
DISCUSSION
We appointed counsel to represent him on appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised. On August 12, 2011, we advised defendant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied defendant's attorney has fully complied with the responsibilities of counsel and no arguable issues exist. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284 [120 S.Ct. 746, 145 L.Ed.2d 756]; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 118-119; People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
JACKSON, J. We concur:
WOODS, Acting P. J.
ZELON, J.