P. v. Green
Filed 6/15/06 P. v. Green CA1/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ANTHONY GREEN, Defendant and Appellant. | A111687 (Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. 5-021053-4) |
Defendant appeals from a judgment and imposition of sentence following guilty verdicts and withdrawal of his plea of not guilty by reason of insanity. His counsel has raised no issues and asks this court for an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any issues that would, if resolved favorably to defendant, result in reversal or modification of the judgment. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436; see Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259.) We affirm.
A two-count amended information was filed on April 8, 2003, charging defendant in count one with inflicting injury on an elder adult (Pen. Code §368, subd. (b)(1)) and in count two with battery causing serious bodily injury (Pen. Code § 242/243, subd. (d)). The amended information also contained allegations pursuant to Penal Code[1] sections 12022.7, subdivision (a); 12022, subdivision (b)(1); 667, subdivision (a)(1); 667, subdivisions (b)-(i); 1170.12; 667.5, subdivision (b); and 1203, subdivision (e)(4). A plea of not guilty by reason of insanity was entered on September 10, 2003.[2] On February 9, 2004, the court heard and ruled on various pretrial motions. Defendant waived his right to a jury trial on the allegations based on his prior conviction in 1998 for violation of section 273.5. Following trial in the guilt phase, the jury returned a verdict finding defendant guilty of elder abuse as charged in count one, not guilty of battery causing serious bodily injury as charged in count two but guilty of the lesser included offense of misdemeanor battery (§242). It found the allegations pursuant to sections 12022.7, subdivision (a), 12022, subdivision (b)(1) to be not true. The sanity phase of the trial followed and ended in a mistrial when the jury was unable to break an eleven-to-one deadlock. The defendant waived time for a retrial of the sanity phase and for trial on the bifurcated prior and agreed to have the trail set within 60 days from March 8, 2004.
After several continuances, defendant withdrew his plea of not guilty by reason insanity on August 22, 2005. He then filed a â€
