P. v. Notman
Filed 7/26/06 P. v. Notman CA1/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JEREMY NOTMAN, Defendant and Appellant. | A110960 (Humboldt County Super. Ct. No. CR005240) |
I. INTTRODUCTION
Pursuant to a plea agreement, in 2002 appellant pled no contest to a charge of placing a child in circumstances likely to cause great bodily injury or death. (See Pen. Code, § 273a, subd. (a).)[1] The court imposed the upper term of six years, but then suspended sentence and placed appellant on probation, with standard conditions, for four years. Thereafter, in 2003 and 2005, appellant was charged with a total of three probation violations. The one charged 2003 violation was admitted by appellant, and the two charged in 2005 found to be true by the court after a contested hearing. The latter result caused appellant's probation to be revoked and his being sent to prison to serve the previously-ordered six-year prison term. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal, but neither requested nor received a certificate of probable cause. (See § 1237.5 and Cal. Rules of Court, rule 30(b).) Appellant has now filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 asking that we review the record and determine if there are any issues deserving of further briefing. We have done so, find none, and hence affirm the judgment.
II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Because the 2002 substantive offense and the 2003 probation violation were the subject of, respectively, a no contest plea and an admission, and because no certificate of probable cause was asked for or obtained, we shall substantially abbreviate our factual description of both matters, but not the contested 2005 probation violations.
The section 273a, subdivision (a) offense was triggered by the December 1999 death of appellant's two-year-old daughter after, according to a witness, appellant had been â€
