P. v. Acie
Filed 7/2/07 P. v. Acie CA4/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JEFFREY A. ACIE, Defendant and Appellant. | D050021 (Super. Ct. No. SCD176918) |
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, David M. Szumowski, Judge. Affirmed.
After the trial court suspended criminal proceedings against Jeffrey A. Acie due to mental incompetence (Pen. Code, 1370 et. seq.), and reinstated the proceedings after finding him competent, Acie entered a negotiated guilty plea to assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, 245, subd. (a)(1)). On June 6, 2005, the court suspended imposition of sentence and placed Acie on probation for three years. On December 12, 2006, the court revoked and reinstated probation on the same terms and conditions after Acie admitted failing to appear at an order to show cause hearing. Acie appeals the order revoking and reinstating probation.
FACTS
On August 26, 2003, after a neighbor complained about noise Acie was making, Acie hit the neighbor in the head with a large pipe. On December 15, 2003, the trial court committed Acie to Patton State Hospital after finding he was not mentally competent. On March 8, 2005, the staff at the state hospital where Acie was receiving treatment found him able to understand the charges against him and to cooperate with his attorney. On April 1, 2005, the court found Acie competent to stand trial. Acie thereafter entered the guilty plea.
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 sufficient evidence supported the finding that Acie was incompetent; (2) whether it was proper to force Acie to take medication and include taking medication as a condition of probation; (3) whether Acie knowingly and intelligently gave up his constitutional rights; and (4) whether complaints made to mental health personnel alleging denial of civil rights are, in effect, a petition for a writ of coram nobis or habeas corpus.
We granted Acie 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 Acie on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
O'ROURKE, J.
WE CONCUR:
HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.
McDONALD, J.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney referral.
Analysis and review provided by Vista Property line attorney.
