P. v. Garcia

Filed 11/28/05 P. v. Garcia CA2/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MARIO RONEY GARCIA, Defendant and Appellant.

B180731 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA135538)

THE COURT:^*

Mario Roney Garcia appeals from the judgment entered upon resentencing after remand by this court (People v. Garcia, B168674), following his conviction by jury of inflicting corporal injury on a cohabitant, unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is more than three years younger than the perpetrator, attempted willful, deliberate, and premeditated murder, and first degree burglary. (Pen. Code, §§ 273.5, subd. (a), 261.5, subd. (c), 664/187, subd. (a), 459.) As to the attempted murder, the jury found that he used a firearm and inflicted great bodily injury under circumstances involving domestic violence. (Pen. Code, §§ 12022.5, subd. (a)(1), former § 12022.7, subd. (d), now § 12022.7, subd. (e).) He was sentenced to life in prison with a 10-year firearm use enhancement for attempted murder and to seven years eight months on the remaining counts.

On resentencing, the trial court stayed the sentence for burglary and imposed a term of three years eight months on the corporal injury and unlawful sexual intercourse counts, with a four-year firearm use enhancement on the attempted murder count. We appointed counsel to represent him on this appeal.

After examination of the record, counsel filed an “Opening Brief” in which no issues were raised.

On September 23, 2005, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.

We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellant’s attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.

Courtesy of California Legal Resource Directory, a source for providers and consumers of legal resources. Because we know legal.

El Cajon Lawyers are available and standing by to help you.

^* BOREN, P. J., DOI TODD, J., ASHMANN-GERST, J.