People v. Palomino CA5

Filed 8/31/16 P. v. Palomino 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F071121

v. (Fresno Super. Ct. No. F14908017)

ANTONIO JESUS PALOMINO, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Jonathan M. Skiles, 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 Gomes, Acting P.J., Detjen, J., and Franson, J.

After defendant Antonio Jesus Palomino attacked his aunt with the claw end of a hammer at her front door, he was convicted by no contest plea of assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)).1 The trial court sentenced him to six years in prison. He filed a notice of appeal; his request for a certificate of probable cause was denied. We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Appointed counsel has 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.) Defendant was advised of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. He responded with a letter, in which he contends defense counsel never mentioned a six-year sentence. Defendant states the last paper he signed was for a 12-month “Teen Challenge” program. He claims he never used the hammer for anything except breaking into cars and stores; his aunt was hallucinating the day she was attacked. He says he would like to know if there was any blood found on the hammer. 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.) On October 14, 2014, defendant pled no contest to assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)), admitted inflicting great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)), and admitted serving a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). There was discussion regarding enrolling defendant in the Teen Challenge inpatient drug treatment program. The court explained to defendant: