Opinion
C088048
09-13-2019
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LOUIS EUGENE SHIELDS, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. 17CF05101)
Appointed counsel for defendant Louis Eugene Shields filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of this case and asks this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) After reviewing the record, we affirm the judgment.
We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)
On September 30, 2017, while at a campground in defendant's motorhome, defendant's girlfriend told him she did not want to continue their relationship. In response, defendant grabbed her by the hair, dragged her 10 feet, grabbed her arms, punched her repeatedly in the arms and legs with a closed fist, kicked her an unknown number of times, and bit her thigh. Afraid to leave, the victim remained with defendant that night.
On the morning of October 2, the victim awoke before defendant, left, and got a ride back to her apartment in Chico. Later that day, the victim saw defendant and saw that he could not start his car. She gave him a ride back to his motorhome, which was still at the campground. As she tried to leave, defendant jumped on the hood of her car, pulled the handle off the car door, and pulled the victim from the car by her hair. Once defendant had the victim out of the car, he hit and kicked her.
A few days later, defendant came to the victim's apartment, knocked on the door, and yelled at her. She partially opened the door and told defendant to leave; he refused. As she closed the door and locked the deadbolt, defendant forced it open breaking the doorjamb. Defendant grabbed a knife from the victim's kitchen and threatened to kill himself. The victim said she was going to call the police; defendant took her guitar and left.
The People later charged defendant with three felonies, including domestic violence (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (f)(1)) and vandalism (§ 594, subd. (a)), and two misdemeanors (§§ 602.5, subd. (b), 484, subd. (a)/490.5, subd. (a)). Related to the domestic violence charge, the People also alleged defendant was convicted of another domestic violence offense within the preceding seven years. Defendant pleaded no contest to domestic violence and admitted the prior conviction. In exchange for his plea, the trial court dismissed the remaining charges with a Harvey waiver.
Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754. --------
In February 2018, the trial court ordered defendant evaluated pursuant to section 1203.03.
In June 2018, the trial court denied defendant's request for new counsel. The following month, the People charged defendant with misdemeanor assault in Butte County Superior Court, case No. 18CM04033.
The trial court subsequently sentenced defendant to the upper term of five years in state prison for his domestic violence conviction. The court ordered defendant to serve a concurrent six-month term in case No. 18CM04033 and another concurrent six-month term in Butte County Superior Court case No. 17CM01545. The court ordered defendant to pay various fines and fees including the $300 minimum restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)(1)), a $40 court operations assessment (§ 1465.8), and a $30 criminal conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373). The court also ordered defendant to pay direct victim restitution and awarded him 644 days of presentence custody credits.
Defendant appealed without a certificate of probable cause. We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Defendant's appellate counsel moved the trial court to strike the court operations and criminal conviction assessments and stay the restitution fine pursuant to People v. Dueñas (2019) 30 Cal.App.5th 1157. Relying on information in the probation report, the trial court denied the request, finding defendant had the ability to pay the fine and fees.
Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed and we have 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.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
/s/_________
Butz, J. We concur: /s/_________
Robie, Acting P. J. /s/_________
Hoch, J.