From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Simmons

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento)
Mar 23, 2018
C085671 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 23, 2018)

Opinion

C085671

03-23-2018

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ELIZABETH ROBERTA SIMMONS, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. 17FE004060)

Appointed counsel for defendant Elizabeth Roberta Simmons has filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) After reviewing the record, we affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

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.)

In case No. 17FE004060, in March 2017, defendant was charged with being a felon in possession of firearm (Pen. Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1); count one) and 11 counts of felony identity theft (§ 530.5, subds. (a), (c)(2); counts two through twelve). With respect to counts two through eight, it was further alleged defendant had suffered a prior conviction in 2011 for section 530.5.

Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. --------

On May 1, 2017, defendant pleaded no contest to count one (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1)) and count nine (§ 530.5, subd. (a)). Defendant entered her plea as part of a global resolution of two additional pending cases against her (case Nos. 17FE005478 & 17FE006000), in exchange for a stipulated sentence of five years and dismissal of the remaining counts with a waiver pursuant to People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754.

Defendant stipulated to the following facts: on February 26, 2017, defendant unlawfully possessed a .45-caliber semiautomatic handgun, having been convicted of a felony in 2011. On February 24, 2017, defendant obtained personal identifying information of James L. without his authorization and used it for an unlawful purpose in an attempt to gain goods worth $2,115.74.

During the May 2017 plea hearing, defendant also pleaded no contest to one count of violating section 530.5, subdivision (a) in each of case Nos. 17FE005478 and 17FE006000.

In August 2017, per the parties' agreement, the trial court denied probation and sentenced defendant to an aggregate term of five years in state prison, as follows: in case No. 17FE004060, three years for count one (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1)) and eight months consecutive for count nine (§ 530.5, subd. (a)), in case No. 17FE006000, eight months consecutive (§ 530.5, subd. (a)), and in case No. 17FE005478, eight months consecutive (§ 530.5, subd. (a)). The trial court terminated mandatory supervision and imposed remaining time (a concurrent two-year term) for Monterey County case No. SS132362A. The trial court dismissed the remaining counts.

In each of case Nos. 17FE004060, 17FE005478, 17FE006000, the trial court also imposed a $300 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)) and a corresponding $300 parole revocation fine suspended unless parole is revoked (§ 1202.45). In addition, the trial court imposed a total of $120 in criminal conviction assessment fees (Gov. Code, § 70373) and $160 in court security fees (§ 1465.8, subd. (a)(1)). Defendant filed a timely appeal and obtained a certificate of probable cause.

DISCUSSION

Appointed counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks us to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Counsel advised defendant of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from defendant.

We have undertaken an examination of the entire record and find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

/s/_________

Blease, Acting P. J. We concur: /s/_________
Butz, J. /s/_________
Mauro, J.


Summaries of

People v. Simmons

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento)
Mar 23, 2018
C085671 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 23, 2018)
Case details for

People v. Simmons

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ELIZABETH ROBERTA SIMMONS…

Court:COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento)

Date published: Mar 23, 2018

Citations

C085671 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 23, 2018)