Filed 7/13/17 P. v. Redd CA5



NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

KEVIN GEROLD REDD,

Defendant and Appellant.

F074370

(Super. Ct. No. RF007532A)


OPINION


THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Kenneth G. Pritchard, Judge.
Julia J. Spikes, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

-ooOoo-



Appellant Kevin Gerold Redd pled no contest to one count of assault with a deadly weapon. Following independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we affirm.
On July 12, 2016, the Kern County District Attorney filed a complaint charging appellant as follows: attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 664, 187/count 1); and assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)/count 2.) The complaint further alleged an enhancement that in the commission of the offense, appellant personally inflicted great bodily injury within the meaning of section 12022.7, subdivision (a).
On July 19, 2016, defense counsel announced that appellant was going to plead no contest pursuant to People v. West (1970) 3 Cal.3d 595, to count 2, assault with a deadly weapon. Count 1 and the enhancement for inflicting great bodily injury were to be dismissed and appellant would receive a sentence of three years in state prison. Thereafter, the district attorney announced the victim was present in court and wished to object to the plea. Following the victim’s statement objecting to the plea agreement, the court continued the hearing until the district attorney handling the case had the opportunity to speak to the victim.
At the subsequent hearing held on July 21, 2016, defense counsel stated that the previously announced plea agreement was no longer on the table and that appellant would plead no contest to count 2, assault with a deadly weapon. Count 1, attempted murder, and the infliction of great bodily injury enhancement were to be dismissed. The plea was entered on the condition appellant would be sentenced to the upper term of four years in state prison.
On August 18, 2016, in accordance with the plea agreement, the court sentenced appellant to four years in state prison. The court ordered appellant to pay a restitution fee directly to the victim pursuant to section 1202.4, subdivision (f) in an amount to be determined by the probation department. Appellant was further ordered to pay a $300 restitution fine pursuant to section 1202.4, subdivision (f)(2) for the Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board reimbursement to the victim, to be determined by the probation department. Appellant was further ordered to pay a court security fee of $40 pursuant to section 1465.8, and an assessment fee of $30 pursuant to Government Code section 70373. The court awarded appellant 84 days’ presentence custody credits.
On September 6, 2016, appellant filed a notice of appeal. The notice details appellant’s claim that he acted in self-defense. Appellant did not request a certificate of probable cause.
The underlying facts, as set forth in the probation report, provide that appellant stabbed the victim, his ex-girlfriend, while she was in the passenger seat of a car. Appellant claimed he was acting in self-defense.
On December 2, 2016, pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, appointed counsel filed an appellant’s opening brief, requesting that this court independently review the entire record on appeal. On that same date, this court advised appellant that he may submit a letter stating any issues on appeal that he wanted the court to consider.
On December 12, 2016, appellant filed a letter brief claiming counsel was ineffective due to a conflict of interest.
On March 15, 2017, appellant filed a supplemental response. The response details matters not relevant to appellant’s conviction and questions whether some error occurred when the three-year plea agreement was not consummated.



DISCUSSION
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied appellant’s attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities and no arguable issues exist. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 126; People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.