legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. T.C. CA5

mk's Membership Status

Registration Date: May 18, 2017
Usergroup: Administrator
Listings Submitted: 0 listings
Total Comments: 0 (0 per day)
Last seen: 05:23:2018 - 13:04:09

Biographical Information

Contact Information

Submission History

Most recent listings:
P. v. Mendieta CA4/1
Asselin-Normand v. America Best Value Inn CA3
In re C.B. CA3
P. v. Bamford CA3
P. v. Jones CA3

Find all listings submitted by mk
P. v. T.C. CA5
By
01:02:2019

Filed 12/12/18 P. v. T.C. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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.

T.C.,

Defendant and Appellant.

F077224

(Super. Ct. No. BF170382A)

OPINION

THE COURT*

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Kern County. Michael G. Bush, Judge.

Stephanie L. Gunther, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

-ooOoo-

Appointed counsel for defendant T.C. asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed and we received no communication from defendant. Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm.

BACKGROUND

On November 22, 2017, defendant was charged with arson (Pen. Code, § 451, subd. (b);[1] count 1), criminal threat (§ 422; count 2), attempting to remove a peace officer’s weapon (§ 148, subd. (d); count 3), resisting a peace officer by force or violence (§ 69; count 4), and providing false identification to a peace officer (§ 148.9, subd. (a), a misdemeanor; count 5). The complaint further alleged that defendant had suffered a prior felony conviction within the meaning of the “Three Strikes” law (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)), and had suffered a prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)).

On December 6, 2017, a doubt regarding defendant’s competence to stand trial was declared and proceedings were suspended pursuant to section 1368. Dr. Carol Matthews evaluated defendant. It was her opinion that defendant was not competent to stand trial.

On February 21, 2018, the trial court committed defendant to the State Department of Mental Health for a maximum of three years. The court awarded defendant custody credits and declined to order involuntary medication.

On March 22, 2018, defendant filed a notice of appeal.

We have reviewed the entire record and find no arguable errors.

DISPOSITION

The order committing defendant to the State Department of Mental Health is affirmed.


* Before Levy, Acting P.J., Meehan, J. and Snauffer, J.

[1] All statutory references are to the Penal Code.





Description Appointed counsel for defendant T.C. asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed and we received no communication from defendant. Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm.
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.
Views 6 views. Averaging 6 views per day.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale