Opinion
C082022
03-21-2017
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. Nos. MAN-CR-FE-2015-0002410, MF039296-A)
This is an appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 123-124. In accordance with the latter, we will provide a summary of the offenses and the proceedings in the trial court.
On July 20, 2015, defendant Jessie Dee Turner spent time drinking with Edward Hunting at another man's home. When Hunting left, he took a bag and a gun that belonged to defendant. Hunting returned the next morning, July 21, 2015, and returned the bag and the gun to defendant. Defendant was upset and held a knife in his hand.
Later that same day, defendant called Hunting and asked what he was doing. After a brief conversation, Hunting drove to where he believed he would find defendant. When he arrived, he saw defendant standing near a truck approximately 100 yards away. As Hunting drove toward defendant, defendant fired shots from a pistol at Hunting's vehicle. One bullet shattered the windshield and struck the dashboard. Glass from the windshield hit Hunting, resulting in injuries to his left eye.
After driving his car into a ditch, Hunting jumped out and ran. Defendant did not run after Hunting. Hunting was later treated at the hospital for cuts and glass in his eye.
The People charged defendant with attempted murder (Pen. Code, § 664/187), assault with a firearm (§ 245, subd. (a)(2)), being a felon in possession of a firearm (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1)), and shooting at an inhabited vehicle (§ 246). The People further alleged defendant personally used a firearm while committing the attempted murder (§ 12022.53, subd. (c)), had a prior strike conviction (§§ 667 subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12), and was previously convicted of a serious felony (§ 667, subd. (a)).
Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. --------
On September 17, 2015, defense counsel raised a doubt as to defendant's competency and the court immediately suspended criminal proceedings. The court appointed two doctors to evaluate defendant's competency. Both doctors found defendant competent to stand trial. Criminal proceedings were then reinstated.
Defendant then moved pursuant to People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 to have appointed counsel dismissed. The trial court conducted a hearing on defendant's motion, then denied the motion.
Defendant subsequently pleaded guilty to assault with a firearm and admitted he personally used a firearm during the commission of his crime. In exchange for defendant's plea, the People moved to dismiss the remaining charges and allegations and agreed defendant would serve an aggregate term of eight years in state prison. The trial court ordered defendant to pay various fines and fees and awarded him 236 days of presentence credit. The court also ordered defendant to pay direct victim restitution in an amount to be determined.
Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal; his request for a certificate of probable cause was granted.
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. 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. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, and we 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.
NICHOLSON, Acting P. J. We concur: MAURO, J. HOCH, J.