Opinion
D076587
06-19-2020
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOSE GUADALUPE TORRES, Defendant and Appellant.
Christine M. Aros, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. JCF37651) APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Imperial County, Marco D. Nunez, Judge. Affirmed. Christine M. Aros, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
In 2018, a jury convicted Jose Guadalupe Torres of assault with a knife (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1); count 3), inflicting injury on a spouse (§ 273.5, subd. (f)(1); counts 4 and 5), and criminal threats while using a knife (§§ 422, subd. (a) and 12022, subd. (b)(1); count 6). Torres admitted a strike prior (§ 667, subds. (b)-(i)), a serious felony prior (§ 667, subd. (a)), and a prison prior (§ 667.5, subd. (b)).
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified.
Torres appealed his convictions. In May 2019, this court affirmed the convictions, but remanded the case to permit the trial court to consider striking the serious felony prior conviction pursuant to section 1385. (People v. Torres (May 29, 2019, D073866) [nonpub. opn.].)
On remand, Torres filed a motion to strike the prior. The trial court held a hearing and considered Torres's performance in prison, the facts of the current offenses and the prior offense. Ultimately, the court found the interests of justice did not support striking the prior and the motion was denied.
Torres again filed a timely notice of appeal.
Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), indicating she has not been able to identify any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered Torres the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal, but he has not responded.
The facts of the underlying offenses are fully set forth in our prior opinion. We will not repeat them in this appeal. --------
DISCUSSION
As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks the court to review the record for error as required by Wende. To assist the court in its review of the record, and in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel has identified a possible issue she considered in evaluating the potential merits of this appeal: Did the court abuse its discretion in denying the motion to strike the serious felony prior conviction in the furtherance of justice.
We have reviewed the entire record as mandated by Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Torres on tis appeal.
DISPOSITION
The order denying Torres's motion to strike the serious felony prior conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)) is affirmed.
HUFFMAN, Acting P. J. WE CONCUR: AARON, J. IRION, J.