People v. Patricio CA2/6

Filed 3/25/25 P. v. Patricio CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B336585 (Super. Ct. No. 23F-01377) Plaintiff and Respondent, (San Luis Obispo County)

v.

DANIEL ANGEL SALIGAN PATRICIO,

Defendant and Appellant.

Daniel Angel Saligan Patricio appeals a judgment following his conviction for two counts of vehicular manslaughter (Pen. Code, § 192, subd. (c)(1).) The trial court sentenced him to state prison for four years on the first count and a consecutive 16 months on the second count. Patricio sought presentence custody credits for the period he was not in custody, but subject to a post- release monitoring program. The court gave him credits for the time he spent in jail, but not for the period he was not in custody on the monitoring program.

1

We appointed counsel to represent Patricio in this appeal. His counsel filed a brief under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, claiming that after reviewing the record he was unable to find any arguable issues for this appeal. On January 21, 2025, we sent notice to Patricio regarding his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days raising any issues he wanted us to consider. He did not file a supplemental brief. Pursuant to Wende, we conclude there are no arguable issues for this appeal. DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

GILBERT, P. J. We concur:

BALTODANO, J.