People v. Culpepper CA3

DISCUSSION

Appointed counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts and procedural history of these cases and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) In that brief, appointed counsel states that defendant “personally requests that the court address the following: whether the court erred in imposing the middle term.” Defendant was advised by counsel of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days from the date the opening brief was filed. More than 30 days have elapsed, and defendant has not filed a supplemental brief. We have identified a discrepancy in the record as to defendant’s sentence for contacting a minor for a sexual offense in case No. 583. The trial court orally imposed a sentence of eight months for this offense, reasoning that it was one-third of the middle term. But the sentencing minute order and the abstract of judgment reflect a four-month term. Further, when orally imposing the sentence, the trial court stated that defendant’s aggregate term was 28 years—a total that only makes sense if the court sentenced defendant to four months for…