Filed 9/28/18 P. v. Santiago CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Shasta)
----
| THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
ERIK SANTIAGO,
Defendant and Appellant.
| C086626
(Super. Ct. No. 17F2786)
|
Appointed counsel for defendant Erik Santiago 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.
We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)
BACKGROUND[1]
The two incidents
In a casino parking lot, the victim met defendant and a friend, and they all decided to smoke marijuana together. The victim was in the driver’s seat of his car. Defendant got into the back seat, sitting behind the victim. The victim then heard the sound of a semi-automatic handgun chambering a round. The victim got out of his car and ran to his hotel room. At some point the victim saw defendant was in fact holding a gun.
When no one was around, the victim came back to his car. He found that eight pairs of his basketball shoes were missing.
Three days later, the victim was shot. He had gone to meet the friend from the previous incident. They were meeting about some prescription pills as well as a recent robbery (presumably the shoe robbery). The victim saw the friend approach his car and get into the front passenger seat. Suddenly, defendant also got into the car and started shooting.
The victim was shot in the temple, neck, and arm. He survived but was seriously injured.
Defendant’s plea and sentencing
In exchange for the dismissal of several counts and a stipulated sentence, defendant pleaded no contest to robbery (Pen. Code, § 211).[2] As to that count, he admitted using a firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)) and that the offense was a serious and violent felony (§§ 667.5, subd. (c)(9), 1192.7, subd. (c)(19)). He also pleaded no contest to assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)), admitting it too was a serious felony. Finally, he pleaded no contest to possessing a firearm as a felon (§ 29800, subd. (a)). The remaining counts were dismissed. The trial court also found defendant in violation of his probation.
On January 4, 2018, the trial court imposed the stipulated 16-year eight-month term, consisting of the five-year upper term for robbery along with a 10-year firearm enhancement; one year for assault (one-third the midterm), and eight months for possessing the firearm as a felon (one-third the midterm). The court also revoked defendant’s current probation and terminated it as unsuccessful.
The court awarded 269 days of custody credit (234 actual; 35 conduct). The court also ordered various fines and fees.
Defendant timely appealed and obtained a certificate of probable cause.
DISCUSSION
Counsel filed an opening brief setting 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 of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from defendant.
Having examined the record, an error in the abstract of judgment requires correction. At sentencing the trial court awarded 269 days of custody credit (234 actual; 35 conduct). The abstract, however, reflects 34 days of conduct credit (though it correctly reflects a total of 269 days). We will direct the trial court to prepare a corrected abstract of judgment. (See People v. Zackery (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 380, 387-388 [the abstract must accurately summarize the oral pronouncement].)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed. The trial court is directed to prepare a corrected abstract of judgment reflecting the award of 269 days of custody credits, comprised of 234 actual days and 35 conduct days, and forward a certified copy thereof to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
RAYE , P. J.
We concur:
MAURO , J.
RENNER , J.
