IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Yolo)
October 14, 2011
THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
KENNETH ALLEN CHATOFF, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
(Super. Ct. No. CRF106155)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Duarte , J.
P. v. Chatoff
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
Appointed counsel for defendant Kenneth Allen Chatoff has asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) We find no errors and no concerns regarding presentence credits. We shall affirm the judgment.
On December 21, 2010, defendant and his wife got into a "tug-of-war" with a cell phone. As they struggled, each attempting to take the phone away from the other, defendant grabbed his wife's wrist and shoved her. Defendant's wife called the police and defendant was arrested.
While being held at the county jail, defendant made 87 phone calls to two numbers used by his wife. During several of those calls, defendant asked his wife to "call parole and say it is all bullshit." Defendant also suggested his wife evade service of the subpoena coming from the prosecutor's office so that she would not have to testify and repeatedly asked her to lie for him.
Defendant was subsequently charged with attempting to dissuade a witness (Pen. Code, § 136.1, subd. (a)(2)), attempting to dissuade a witness accompanied by force or threat (Pen. Code, § 136.1, subd. (c)(1)), and misdemeanor battery of a cohabitant (Pen. Code, § 243, subd. (e)(1)). It was further alleged that defendant previously served two prison terms.
Defendant pleaded no contest to one count of attempting to dissuade a witness, and agreed to the upper term of three years in state prison. In exchange for defendant's plea, the remaining charges and sentencing enhancement allegations were to be dismissed.
Defendant waived a referral to probation and was sentenced in accordance with his plea. Defendant was ordered to pay various fines and fees and was awarded 188 days of custody credit (126 actual and 62 conduct).
Defendant appeals; his request for a certificate of probable cause was granted.
Appointed counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asked this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (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 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.
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: BLEASE , Acting P. J. HULL , J.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.