People v. Norton CA3

Filed 1/5/22 P. v. Norton CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Butte) ----

THE PEOPLE, C094059

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 19CF02204)

v.

THOMAS ARTHUR NORTON,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Thomas Arthur Norton has filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) After examining the record, we find no arguable error that would result in an outcome more favorable to defendant and affirm the judgment. I. BACKGROUND 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, 123-124.)

1

From December 2007 to December 2008, when D.S. was approximately six years old, she lived with defendant and his wife. During that period, defendant sexually abused D.S. When she was around eight or nine years old, D.S. left defendant’s home to live with her mother, but she returned to defendant’s custody when she was 13. When D.S. returned to defendant’s home, he began again to sexually abuse D.S. When she was 16 years old, D.S. reported the abuse to her boyfriend’s mother, who in turn contacted law enforcement. During their investigation, law enforcement learned defendant was a registered sex offender. Defendant was subsequently charged with numerous criminal offenses including committing a lewd act upon a child under the age of 14 (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a)), and annoying or molesting a child under the age of 18, having been previously convicted of sexually abusing a minor child (Pen. Code, § 647.6, subd. (c)(2)), both to which he pled no contest. In exchange for defendant’s plea, the People moved the trial court to dismiss the remaining charges and allegations with a Harvey waiver.1 The court subsequently sentenced defendant to an aggregate term of nine years four months in state prison. The court ordered him to pay various fines and fees and awarded him 839 days of custody credit. Defendant appealed without a certificate of probable cause. II. DISCUSSION Appointed counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks us to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Counsel advised defendant of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed and we received no communication from defendant.