The People v. Garcia CA2/8

FACTS

We detailed the underlying facts in the prior nonpublished opinion. (People v. Garcia (Aug. 28, 2012, B237667 [nonpub. opn.].) Those facts are not at issue here. In our previous decision we modified the judgment to impose five consecutive five-year terms for each conviction. At a subsequent re-sentencing hearing, defense counsel argued this court’s opinion as to sentencing was incorrect. The trial court modified the sentence as we had directed, and advised defendant of his right to seek review in the California Supreme Court.1

DISCUSSION

Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. We appointed appellate defense counsel. On June 12, 2013, appellant’s appointed counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. On the same day, we notified appellant by letter that he could submit within 30 days any ground of appeal, contention, or argument which he wished us to consider. Appellant has not filed a response. We have independently reviewed the record submitted on appeal, and are satisfied that appellant’s appointed counsel has fulfilled his duty, and that no arguable issues exist. (See People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, People…