Filed 10/11/17 P. v. Valdez 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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.
ROGER LEE VALDEZ,
Defendant and Appellant.
|
F074851
(Super. Ct. No. F16903086)
OPINION |
THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Glenda S. Allen-Hill, Judge.
Victoria H. Stafford, 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 Roger Lee Valdez 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.) We sent a letter to defendant, advising him 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 the judgment.
We provide the following brief description of the factual and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)
On May 6, 2016, defendant was acting aggressively toward his longtime companion. Ultimately, he pushed her against the wall and punched her in the face, causing a laceration.
On September 15, 2016, defendant pled no contest to inflicting corporal injury on a cohabitant (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a)).
On October 14, 2016, the trial court found unusual circumstances, suspended imposition of sentence, and granted defendant three years of probation with 145 days of jail time. The court granted credits and imposed various fines and fees and a criminal protective order.
Our review of the entire record has revealed no arguable issues on appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
* Before Poochigian, Acting P.J., Detjen, J. and Peña, J.
