IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sutter)
April 5, 2012
THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
DENNY GENE MCCARTY, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
(Super. Ct. No. CRF101311)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Murray , J.
P. v. McCarty
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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's 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 Kelly, we will provide a summary of the offenses and the proceedings in the trial court.
Pursuant to a plea bargain, defendant Denny Gene McCarty pled no contest to assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1) -- count 1)*fn1 with an admission of personal infliction of great bodily injury on the victim (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)) in exchange for a stipulated 10-year state prison term and the dismissal of other counts and charges. He also admitted a prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12) and the service of a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)).
Defendant requested immediate sentencing and the court imposed the stipulated 10-year term, credited him with 347 days of presentence custody (302 days actually served plus 45 days for good conduct),*fn2 and imposed fines, fees and assessments as set forth in detail in the abstract of judgment.
According to the preliminary hearing transcript,*fn3 Anthony Echevarria, Kenneth Schneider and defendant were together at Schneider's residence. Echevarria and Schneider got into a fist fight. Defendant got involved in the fight and hit Echevarria in the head with a cinder block. Echevarria suffered a partial loss of consciousness from the blow and seven staples were required to close the head wound.
Appointed counsel for defendant filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks us to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Counsel advised defendant 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 examination of the entire record and find no arguable issues that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: RAYE , P. J. DUARTE , J.