Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County No. TF005182A, Craig Phillips, Judge.
Deborah Prucha, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Before Wiseman, Acting P.J., Cornell, J., and Dawson, J.
On January 6, 2009, appellant Darin Michael Smith pled no contest to willful infliction of corporal injury on a cohabitant (Pen. Code, § 273.5). Terms of the plea agreement included the following: Appellant would be sentenced to no more than three years in prison, and the only other charge—that he committed first degree burglary (Pen. Code, §§ 459, 460, subd. (a))—would be dismissed. On March 10, 2009, the court imposed a prison term of two years, awarded appellant 12 days of presentence credit, and ordered appellant to pay, inter alia, a $200 restitution fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.4, subd. (b)) and a parole revocation fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.45) in the same amount. The court stayed the latter fine pending successful completion of parole.
On April 1, 2009, appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. He did not request, and the court did not issue, a certificate of probable cause (Pen. Code, § 1237.5).
Appellant’s appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which summarizes the pertinent facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks that this court independently review the record. (Peoplev.Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d. 436.) Appellant has not responded to this court’s invitation to submit additional briefing.
The report of the probation officer stated, according to a Kern County Sheriff’s Department report, the following: Carrie Osborn, appellant’s live-in girlfriend, reported that appellant “punched [her] on both sides of her torso[,] causing her to fall to the ground, hitting her nose on the sink and finally coming to rest with her head hitting the toilet.” Osborn sustained two black eyes and a “major laceration” to her forehead which required seven stitches.
Following independent review of the record, we have concluded that no reasonably arguable legal or factual issues exist.
The judgment is affirmed.