People v. Soth CA6

Filed 7/28/15 P. v. Soth CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, H041451 (Santa Clara County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. C1477377)

v.

JAIME SOTH,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Jaime Soth was convicted by plea of one count of assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)). (Further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.) Defendant also admitted enhancement allegations that he had a prior conviction that was a strike under the “Three Strikes” law (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i); 1170.12). The plea and sentence in this case were part of a package deal that resolved a previous case in which defendant was charged with murder, with enhancements. The plea also resolved an unfiled case in which a charge of dissuading a witness, with gang enhancements, was pending. The court designated the murder as the principal case and sentenced defendant to 38 years to life on that conviction. The court also sentenced defendant to two additional years (one-third the middle term (§ 1170.1, subd. (a)), doubled for the strike prior) for the assault with a deadly weapon conviction, consecutive to his sentence on the murder conviction. In exchange for defendant’s pleas, the

prosecution agreed to dismiss the dissuading a witness charge that was pending. In this appeal, defendant challenges only the judgment in the assault with a deadly weapon case. We appointed counsel to represent defendant in this court. Appointed counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) in the assault with a deadly weapon case only, which stated the case and the facts, but raised no specific issues on appeal. We notified defendant of his right to submit written argument on his own behalf within 30 days. The 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no written argument from defendant. We will conclude there is no arguable issue on appeal and will affirm the judgment.