People v. Gomez CA4/3

Filed 2/25/21 P. v. Gomez CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G059270

v. (Super. Ct. No. 18WF0033)

ADRIAN GOMEZ, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Julian W. Bailey, Judge. Affirmed. John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *

1. Introduction Adrian Gomez filed a notice of appeal from a judgment entered following a jury verdict convicting him of assault with a deadly weapon and finding true the allegation that he inflicted great bodily injury on the victim. His appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) setting forth the facts of the case and requesting that we review the entire record. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel identified one issue to assist us in conducting our independent review. Gomez was granted 30 days in which to file a supplemental brief on his own behalf. He has not filed a supplemental brief. We have examined the record in accordance with our obligations under Wende and Anders and have found no arguable issues on appeal. The issue suggested by counsel does not have merit. We therefore affirm. 2. Jury Verdict and Sentencing Gomez was charged by information with one count of attempted murder in violation of Penal Code sections 187, subdivision (a) and 664, subdivision (a) (count 1) and one count of assault with a deadly weapon in violation of Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a)(1) (count 2). The information alleged Gomez was on parole when he committed the offenses. (Id., § 1203.085, subd. (b).) The information alleged three enhancements: (1) as to both counts, infliction of great bodily injury on the victim (id., § 12022.7, subd. (a)); (2) as to count 1, personal use of a deadly weapon during the commission of the offense (id., § 12022, subd. (b)(1)); and (3) as to count 1, commission of the offense willfully, deliberately, and with premeditation (id., § 664, subd. (a)). The information also alleged that Gomez previously had been convicted of a strike offense (id., § 667, subds. (d), (e)(1)) and a serious felony (id., § 667, subd. (a)(1)), and had served a prior prison term (id., § 667.5, subd. (b)). The jury found Gomez not guilty of attempted murder and of the lesser included offense of attempted voluntary manslaughter. The jury found Gomez guilty of