P. v. Harnage
Filed 4/4/06 P. v. Harnage 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977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. WILLIAM L. HARNAGE, Defendant and Appellant. | D046813 (Super. Ct. No. SCS148074) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Terry Scott and Wesley R. Mason, Judges. Affirmed.
On April 5, 2000, William L. Harnage entered a guilty plea to assault with a deadly weapon or force likely to produce great bodily injury and admitted inflicting great bodily injury with personal use of a knife. (Pen. Code, §§ 245, subd. (a)(1), 12022.7, subd. (a), 1192.7, subd. (c)(23).) On May 3, the court suspended imposition of sentence and placed him on five years' probation, including a condition he serve 365 days in custody and obey all laws. On April 19, 2005, the court revoked probation after Harnage admitted violating the conditions of probation. It sentenced him to prison for five years: the two-year lower term for assault with a deadly weapon or force likely to produce great bodily injury, enhanced three years for inflicting great bodily injury.
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 possible but not arguable issues: (1) whether the trial court abused its discretion in not reinstating probation, (2) whether the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing Harnage to prison for five years, and (3) whether the trial court was aware of its sentencing choices.[1]
We granted Harnage permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He 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 Harnage on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
IRION, J.
WE CONCUR:
HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.
McINTYRE, J.
Publication courtesy of California pro bono lawyer directory.
Analysis and review provided by Chula Vista Apartment Manager Attorneys.
[1] Because Harnage entered a guilty plea, he cannot challenge the facts underlying the conviction. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5; People v. Martin (1973) 9 Cal.3d 687, 693.) We need not recite the facts.
