P. v. Anderson
Filed 3/6/07 P. v. Anderson CA2/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MONAIR ANDERSON, Defendant and Appellant. | B191191 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NA066809) |
THE COURT:*
On June 7, 2005, appellant, Monair Anderson, went to the 7-Eleven store on Pacific Coast Highway and Temple and began yelling and screaming at two men. A woman walked toward the door to the 7-Eleven store. Appellant hit her on the side of her face, near her eye, with his fist and forearm. The woman suffered a cut to her right eye, at the eye socket, both eyes were black and blue, her face was swollen, she received four stitches and experienced headaches for a couple of weeks. She still had a scar at the time of trial.
As a result of the foregoing facts, appellant was convicted in a court trial of assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury (Pen. Code, 245, subd. (a)), the court also finding that appellant personally inflicted great bodily injury within the meaning of Penal Code section 12022.7, subdivision (a). The trial court sentenced him to the lower term of two years, staying the great bodily injury enhancement.
We appointed counsel to represent him on this appeal. Appellant appeals the judgment entered upon this conviction.
After examination of the record, counsel filed an Opening Brief in which no issues were raised.
On September 19, 2006, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellants attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.
Publication Courtesy of California free legal resources.
Analysis and review provided by Spring Valley Property line Lawyers.
* BOREN, P. J., DOI TODD, J., ASHMANN-GERST, J.
