People v. Fries CA5

Filed 8/25/23 P. v. Fries CA5 Opinion after recalling remittitur

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F082639 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. F19907042) v.

MICHAEL JAMES FRIES, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Adolfo M. Corona, Judge. Kristine Koo, 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 Hill, P. J., Detjen, J. and Smith, J.

On April 20, 2022, this court issued an opinion affirming defendant, Michael James Fries, conviction for assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury. Defendant’s appointed counsel had filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, identifying no error and asking the court to determine whether there were any arguable issues on appeal. Defendant was afforded an opportunity to submit a supplemental brief but failed to do so in the time allotted. After remittitur issued, his counsel moved the court to vacate its opinion and remittitur and afford defendant an additional opportunity to submit a supplemental brief. This court granted defendant’s motion. On August 16, 2022, defendant filed a supplemental brief, (1) requesting that the court “speak to” an officer who witnessed the incident giving rise to his conviction, (2) requesting that the court “speak to” an officer who characterized his arrest as a “ ‘false arrest,’ ” (3) contending that his statement to an officer on the date of his arrest was not provided to him in discovery, and (4) contending that the statement that he made to an officer on the date of his arrest was not provided to the district attorney’s office. Defendant identifies no basis for relief, nor has our independent review of the record. We affirm. BACKGROUND On October 15, 2019, after defendant refused to stop piling his tree trimmings in front of his neighbor’s house, his neighbor confronted him. Defendant started a fight, brandishing and swinging a knife at the neighbor, striking his chest. The neighbor then responded with aggression and both men were injured. On October 17, 2019, the Fresno County District Attorney charged defendant with assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code,1 § 245, subd. (a)(1); count 1).