IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (San Joaquin)
January 28, 2011
THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
JOSE MANUEL ZAVALA, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
(Super. Ct. No. SF101707A)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Butz ,j.
P. v. Zavala 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
Defendant Jose Manuel Zavala was convicted by his guilty plea of two counts of attempted second degree murder and one count of actively participating in a criminal street gang. The trial court sentenced him to 22 years in state prison.
Defendant's ensuing appeal is subject to the principles of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110. In accordance with the latter, we will provide a summary of the offenses and the proceedings in the trial court.
Defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of attempted second degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187/664)*fn1 and one count of actively participating in a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (a)), and admitted he personally used a firearm during the commission of one of the counts of attempted murder (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)). In exchange for the pleas, numerous charges and enhancements were dismissed, and defendant agreed to a sentence of 22 years in state prison with a waiver of all but 365 days of custody credit. At the subsequent sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced defendant in accordance with this agreement.
According to the evidence presented at the preliminary examination, the charges stemmed from an incident in which defendant--a member of a criminal street gang--drove by the victims with an accomplice, who shot at the victims, killing one person and injuring two others.
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and, pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, requesting the court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. 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. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from defendant.
We have undertaken an independent examination of the entire record and have found no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
The judgment is affirmed.