Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. CC760823
Bamattre-Manoukian, ACTING P.J.
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendant Anthony Wright pleaded no contest to the felony offense of hit and run accident resulting in injury (Veh. Code, § 20001, subd. (a)) and the misdemeanor offense of driving with a suspended license (Veh. Code, § 14601, subd. (a)). The trial court placed defendant on felony probation for three years, with probation conditions that included serving one year in county jail and paying victim restitution.
Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal, and we appointed counsel to represent him in this court. Appointed counsel has filed an opening brief that states the case and facts but raises no issue. We notified defendant of his right to submit written argument in his own behalf within 30 days. The period has elapsed and we have received no response from defendant. Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have reviewed the entire record. Based on our review, we have concluded that there is no arguable issue on appeal. Following the California Supreme Court’s direction in People v. Kelly, supra, 40 Cal.4th at page 110, we provide “a brief description of the . . . procedural history of the case, the crimes of which the defendant was convicted, and the punishment imposed.”
II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The charged offenses arose from an automobile accident that took place on March 9, 2007, at approximately 6:00 a.m. According to the preliminary hearing testimony, shortly before the accident occurred defendant was driving an automobile in an eastbound lane of Story Road in San Jose. At the same time, Andree Blake was riding a motorcycle in a westbound lane of Story Road. After Blake passed through the intersection of Story Road and White Road, he struck defendant’s automobile as it was turning left in front of him towards the driveway of the Super Tacqueria restaurant. Blake was knocked off his motorcycle and became airborne before sliding to a rest on his back. His injuries included an open fracture of the right femur, a closed fracture of the left femur, a fracture dislocation of the left shoulder, and a large open wound in the right thigh.
Two witnesses to the accident informed the investigating police officer that defendant’s automobile had cut in front of the motorcycle and caused the collision. The witnesses also observed that defendant did not stop after the collision. Defendant continued his left turn into the parking lot of the Super Tacqueria restaurant and then drove out of the parking lot onto White Road. One of the witnesses followed defendant’s automobile and obtained his vehicle license number.
Further investigation included the Stockton Police Department’s contact with defendant on the day of the accident. After being read his Miranda rights, defendant admitted that he had been involved in a collision with a motorcycle in San Jose that day, that he had seen the motorcycle on the ground, and that he had fled the area without making contact with the motorcycle rider or knowing whether he was injured.
Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436.
During the preliminary hearing, defendant’s counsel stipulated that defendant’s driver’s license was suspended at the time of the March 9, 2007, automobile accident.
III. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Defendant was charged by complaint with the felony offense of hit and run accident resulting in permanent serious injury or death (Veh. Code, § 20001, subds. (a), (b)(2); count 1) and the misdemeanor offense of driving with a suspended license (Veh. Code, § 14601.1, subd. (a); count 2). Defendant was held to answer on both charges after the preliminary hearing held on November 2, 2007, and an information including both charges was filed on November 9, 2007.
On January 8, 2008, as part of the plea agreement, count 1 of the information was amended by striking the words “permanent,” “serious,” and “or death,” so that the offense charged would be a violation of Vehicle Code section 20001, subdivision (a), which all parties understood would “not be a strike.” Defendant then entered a plea of no contest to count 1 (Veh. Code, § 20001, subd. (a)) and count 2 (Veh. Code, § 14601, subd. (a)), in exchange for being placed on felony probation for three years with the probation conditions to include one year in county jail.
At the sentencing hearing held on April 17, 2008, the trial court placed defendant on formal probation for three years. The conditions of probation included one year in county jail and payment of victim restitution to Blake Andree in the amount of $21,866.17, plus payment of $5,989.83 to the state Victim’s Compensation and Government Claims Board. The amount of the payments corresponded with the probation officer’s recommendation, as set forth in the waived referral report filed on April 17, 2008.
A judgment and victim restitution order was entered on May 29, 2008. The victim restitution order stated that defendant had been informed of his right to a judicial determination of the amount of victim restitution and that defendant had waived the hearing and stipulated to the amount of the restitution order.
Defendant filed a notice of appeal on June 13, 2008, that indicated that the appeal was “based on the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304).”
Having carefully reviewed the entire record, we are satisfied that there are no arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at pp. 441-443.)
IV. DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
WE CONCUR: MCADAMS, J., DUFFY, J.