P. v. Lemus CA4/3

Filed 4/22/13 P. v. Lemus 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, G047118

v. (Super. Ct. No. 10WF0903)

DAVID SANTILLAN LEMUS, O P I N I O N

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Richard M. King, Judge. Affirmed. Jan B. Norman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

* * *

Defendant David Santillan Lemus was convicted by a jury of an assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)). They acquitted him of charges of attempted murder and criminal threats, and were unable to reach a verdict on the lesser included offense of attempted voluntary manslaughter, arising from the same altercation. The trial court declared a mistrial on that charge and later dismissed it in the interests of justice (Pen. Code, § 1385, subd. (a)). Defendant was sentenced to the midterm of three years for the assault with a deadly weapon and ordered to pay restitution and various fines and fees. He filed a timely appeal. We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. While not arguing against defendant, counsel filed a brief which fully set forth the facts of the case and advised us there were no arguable issues on appeal. The brief included a review of the record and consideration of possible arguments, but concluded none of those arguments had any chance of success. We informed defendant he had 30 days to file written argument on his own behalf. Three months have passed and we have received no such argument. We have reviewed the record of defendant’s trial and the brief filed by defendant’s counsel, and find ourselves in agreement with defendant’s counsel: There is no arguable error in the proceedings against defendant. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.)