People v. Bernal CA2/6

Filed 3/25/26 P. v. Bernal CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. B347319 (Super. Ct. No. 25F-01722) Plaintiff and Respondent, (San Luis Obispo County)

v.

ZACHARY TOMAS BERNAL,

Defendant and Appellant.

Zachary Tomas Bernal appeals a judgment after he pleaded guilty to vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, without gross negligence (Pen. Code, § 191.5, subd. (b); count 1), leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death (Veh. Code, § 20001, subd. (a); count 2), and possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a); count 3). With respect to count 1, Bernal admitted that he fled the scene of a crime in violation of Vehicle Code section 20001, subdivision (c). The trial court sentenced Bernal to seven years in state prison, comprised of the midterm of two years on count 1 and a consecutive five years for leaving the scene of an accident. The

court stayed the punishment for count 2 pursuant to Penal Code section 654 and imposed a concurrent sentence of 364 days for count 3. Bernal struck and killed a child when he drove his truck on the sidewalk. He fled from the scene, abandoned his truck, and was later arrested. Bernal was under the influence of fentanyl while driving and possessed a usable amount. We appointed counsel to represent Bernal. Counsel examined the record and filed an opening brief requesting that this court independently review the entire record on appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). On December 29, 2025, we sent a notice to the address on file for Bernal advising he had 30 days to submit any grounds for appeal, contentions, or arguments he wished us to consider. We have received no such submission from Bernal. We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that Bernal’s counsel has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 443.) The judgment is affirmed. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.