People v. Ehens CA2/6

Filed 3/7/23 P. v. Ehens CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B322838 (Super. Ct. No. 19F-05786) Plaintiff and Respondent, (San Luis Obispo County)

v.

MATTHEW LEROY EHENS,

Defendant and Appellant.

Matthew Leroy Ehens appeals a restitution order imposed following his plea of nolo contendere to torture with personal use of a deadly weapon, and elder abuse with the infliction of great bodily injury and personal use of a deadly weapon. (Pen. Code, §§ 206, 12022, subd. (b)(1), 368, subds. (b)(1) & (2), 12022.7, subd. (c).) Evidence presented at the preliminary examination disclosed that on August 2, 2019, Ehens argued with his 79-year- old foster mother. He then threw hot oil on her face and stabbed her in the back with a kitchen knife.

On August 25, 2021, Ehens waived his trial rights, pleaded nolo contendere to the torture and elder abuse counts, and admitted the personal weapon use and great bodily injury allegations. Ehens also agreed to pay specific amounts of restitution to his foster mother, the California Victim Compensation Board, and a property owner whose landscape he damaged during his flight from the scene. Pursuant to a plea agreement, the trial court sentenced Ehens to eight years to life for the torture and personal weapon use enhancement, and stayed sentence for the elder abuse and related enhancements. The court also found that Ehens did not have the present financial ability to pay certain fines and therefore did not impose them. We appointed counsel to represent Ehens in this appeal. After counsel’s examination of the record, he filed an opening brief raising no issues. On January 12, 2023, we advised Ehens that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues that he wished to raise on appeal. We have not received a response. We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that Ehens’s attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)