Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Solano County Super. Ct. No. FCR232032
Reardon, J.
A jury found appellant Stephen Earl Scally guilty of misdemeanor elder abuse (Pen. Code, § 368, subd. (c)), a lesser included offense of felony elder abuse (Pen. Code, § 368, subd. (b)(1)), of which he was acquitted. He was granted credit for time served in the amount of 365 days, with no probation.
The victim, Judith Scally, the 66-year-old mother of appellant, testified that appellant was working on a computer in her bedroom. She asked him to finish his work because she wanted to retire. Appellant responded that he would finish work shortly, and Ms. Scally returned to the kitchen.
Approximately two hours later, Ms. Scally returned to the bedroom. Appellant was still working on the computer. She tapped appellant on the shoulder with a paring knife she had been using in the kitchen. Appellant spun around and Ms. Scally, trying to avoid him, lost her balance, fell and struck her head on a dresser, injuring her mouth, nose, cheek and eye.
Paramedic Nicholas Brady, who treated Ms. Scally, testified that she stated to him and his partner that she was “taken out of bed and thrown into furniture by her son.” Fairfield Police Sergeant Boggs, who also responded to the scene, testified that she stated that “she was assaulted by her grown son who lived with her at the residence . . . .” Specifically, she stated that he “shoved her hard on the back which caused her to fall into a nearby desk.”
Ms. Scally denied making these statements to paramedic Brady and Sergeant Boggs. Appellant testified that he did not assault his mother.
Counsel for appellant has filed an opening brief raising no issues and asking this court for an independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. We have conducted the requested review and conclude that there are no arguable issues.
Appellant has been informed of his right to file a supplemental brief and has not filed one.
Appellant was represented throughout the proceedings by counsel. The evidence is sufficient to support the jury’s verdict. There was no timely objection to the admission or exclusion of evidence. The jury was correctly instructed.
Judgment affirmed.
We concur: Ruvolo, P.J., Rivera, J.