People v. Miller CA5

Filed 6/16/16 P. v. Miller CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, F069467

v. (Kern Super. Ct. No. BF146261A)

LATISHA MILLER, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Steven M. Katz, Judge. Francine R. Tone, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Kane, Acting P.J., Poochigian, J., and Smith, J.

Appointed counsel for defendant Latisha Miller 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).) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment. We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.) According to the probation officer’s report, the following is a summary of a report made by the Kern County District Attorney’s Office: “On August 16, 2012, a welfare fraud investigation was initiated revealing between the dates of June 1, 2008 and November 30, 2009 Latisha Miller, the defendant, admitted failing to report income she received through the In Home Health Support Services. It was determined the defendant received an over issuance of food stamps in the amount of $4,393.00 and an overpayment of cash aid in the amount of $4,570.00 for a total of $8,963.00. Upon speaking to the defendant she admitted culpability, but stated she did as her aunt told her to do.” On January 24, 2014, defendant pled no contest to welfare fraud (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 10980, subd. (c)(2)).1 The trial court dismissed a perjury count (Pen. Code, § 118)2 in the furtherance of justice.

1 Welfare and Institutions Code section 10980, subdivision (c)(2) provides: “Whenever any person has, willfully and knowingly, with the intent to deceive, by means of false statement or representation, or by failing to disclose a material fact, or by impersonation or other fraudulent device, obtained or retained aid under the provisions of this division for himself or herself or for a child not in fact entitled thereto, the person obtaining this aid shall be punished as follows: [¶] … [¶] (2) If the total amount of the aid obtained or retained is more than nine hundred fifty dollars ($950), by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 of the Penal Code for a period of 16 months, two years, or three years, by a fine of not more than five thousand dollars ($5,000), or by both that imprisonment and fine; or by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of not more than one year, by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both imprisonment and fine.” 2 All statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise noted.