P. v. Carman
Filed 1/10/07 P. v. Carman CA4/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. BRANDI LYNN CARMAN, Defendant and Appellant. | D049235 (Super. Ct. No. SCS198281) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Robert Trentacosta, Judge. Affirmed.
Brandi Lynn Carman entered a negotiated guilty plea to taking or driving another's car without permission. (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a).) The court suspended imposition of sentence and placed her on three years probation including a condition she serve 180 days in custody. It ordered Carman to pay $3,883.26 victim restitution. The record does not include a certificate of probable cause. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304 [former rule 30(b)].)
FACTS
On October 15, 2005, Carman drove a car to the border crossing at the San Ysidro entry point from Mexico. Immigration agents found three undocumented aliens hidden in the car trunk. The agents discovered the vehicle had been stolen. The car was damaged beyond repair. The insurer of the car's owner paid the owner $2,583.26 for damage to the car. The owner was not reimbursed $1,000 deductible nor $200 for loss of a backpack and textbooks that were inside the car when it was stolen.
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief setting forth the evidence in the superior court. Counsel presents no argument for reversal but asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel refers to as a possible, but not arguable, issue whether the trial court erred in ordering Carman to pay restitution to the victim in an amount that included the insurer's payment to the car owner for the damage.
We granted Carman permission to file a brief on her own behalf. She has not responded. A review of the entire record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, including the possible issues referred to pursuant to Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issue. Competent counsel has represented Carman on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
__________________________
O'ROURKE, J.
WE CONCUR:
___________________________
McCONNELL, P. J.
___________________________
BENKE, J.
Publication courtesy of California pro bono legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by La Mesa Property line Lawyers.
