Filed 8/14/17 P. v. Grosvenor CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Sacramento)

----

Appointed counsel for defendant Mark Grosvenor asks this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we will affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND

When Patricia Freeman saw defendant pushing Freddie Hunter’s 1980 Chevrolet El Camino down the street, she called Hunter to let him know. About 40 minutes later, Hunter found his car about a quarter-mile away from Freeman’s home. Defendant was sitting in the driver’s seat. Hunter confronted defendant, punching him and tearing his pants as he attempted to flee, then chasing him. Hunter also called the police. Defendant picked up a piece of firewood and swung it at Hunter. Responding police officers caught defendant, and Hunter identified him as the man who had been inside his car. Officers found a piece of fabric near the passenger side of the El Camino that matched the hole in defendant’s pants. The passenger door of the El Camino was damaged from having been forced open and the steering column had been damaged. Officers also found defendant’s jacket inside the El Camino.

An amended information charged defendant with unlawfully taking and driving a motor vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)--count one), and assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)--count two).[1] The information also alleged defendant had a prior conviction for unlawful taking or driving a motor vehicle (§ 666.5, subd. (a)), a prior serious felony conviction (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12); and had served two prior prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (b)).

The jury found defendant guilty on count one, and deadlocked on count two. The trial court declared a mistrial on count two and granted the People’s motion to dismiss. In bifurcated proceedings, the trial court found all the prior conviction enhancements true. Defendant also admitted a probation violation in an unrelated case.

The trial court sentenced defendant to an aggregate term of five years eight months in state prison, calculated as follows: (1) two years for the auto theft with a prior, doubled to four years under the three strikes law; (2) one year for one prior prison term enhancement; and (3) eight months, one-third the middle term, in the probation violation case. The court also imposed a $1,500 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)), imposed and stayed an identical a parole revocation restitution fine (§ 1202.45); a $40 criminal conviction fee (§ 1465.8, subd. (a)(1)), a $30 court facility fee (Gov. Code, § 70373), various other fees, and direct victim restitution in an amount to be determined (§ 1202.4, subd. (a)). The court awarded defendant 429 days of presentence custody credit in the current case and 120 days of credit for time served in the probation violation case.

DISCUSSION

Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests that we review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of the filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have 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.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

/s/

Duarte, J.

We concur:

/s/

Blease, Acting P. J.

/s/

Nicholson, J.