P. v. Madrid
Filed 7/31/07 P. v. Madrid CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. BRANDON NICOLAS MADRID, Defendant and Appellant. | F051534 (Super. Ct. No. F06903269-9) O P I N I O N |
THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. David Andrew Gottlieb, Judge.
James L. Lozenski, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
On April 28, 2006, appellant, 18-year-old Brandon Nicolas Madrid, was playing third base in a high school baseball game in Fresno, when a player from the other team hit a ground ball into the outfield. Danny Barajas was on second base and ran to third base and then toward home base. However, he had to run back to third base and slid head first to avoid being tagged out. After Barajas stood up, Madrid told him, Dont push me bitch. Barajas replied, Just play the game bitch. Madrid then punched Barajas in the face when Barajas was not looking. The blow broke Barajass jaw requiring his father to drive him to the hospital where Barajas jaws were wired shut. Barajas subsequently required four surgeries to fix the damage to his jaw.
On May 11, 2006, the district attorney filed a complaint charging Madrid with battery with serious bodily injury (Pen. Code, 243, subd. (d)).
On July 21, 2006, Madrid entered into a plea bargain which provided that in exchange for his no contest plea to the battery charge he would face a maximum term of three years, although the court indicated that it would initially place Madrid on felony probation.
On September 22, 2006, the court placed Madrid on probation for three years on condition that he serve 240 days local time.
Madrids appellate counsel has filed a brief which summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Madrid has not responded to this courts invitation to submit additional briefing.
Following independent review of the record we find that no reasonably arguable factual or legal issues exist.
The judgment is affirmed.
Publication courtesy of California free legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Carlsbad Property line attorney.
* Before Levy, Acting P.J.; Cornell, J.; and Gomes, J.
