P. v. Smith
Filed 5/9/06 P. v. Smith CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Trinity)
----
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CRAIG DEWITT SMITH, Defendant and Appellant. | C050699 (Super. Ct. No. 05F048) |
Defendant Craig Dewitt Smith rear-ended a vehicle that had stopped at a pedestrian crosswalk, negligently causing injury to a person in the vehicle as well as to a pedestrian hit by the vehicle. Defendant pled no contest to one count of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, thereby neglecting a duty imposed by law and causing bodily injury. (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (a).) The court sentenced defendant to the upper term of three years, suspended execution thereof, and granted probation on condition defendant serve one year in jail and thereafter enroll in a six-month treatment program to alleviate his substance abuse. Defendant agreed in writing to abide by these and the other terms and conditions of probation.
The court sentenced defendant to the upper term because his prior convictions were numerous and of increasing seriousness. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421(b)(2).) The probation report listed defendant's 13 convictions since 1970, including felony convictions for cultivating marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11358) in 1991 and driving under the influence of alcohol or a drug with three prior convictions in the preceding 10 years (Veh. Code, §§ 23152, 23550) in 1995. Defendant filed a notice of appeal that states it was based on the sentence or other matters that occurred after entry of the plea.
DISCUSSION
People v. Wende
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief which sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. (AOB 10-11) More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
Mandatory Fines, Penalties, Assessments, and Fees
The order granting probation includes â€
