People v. Connolly CA3

DISCUSSION

We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts and procedural history of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief and has filed a one-page, handwritten brief relaying that he held a valid driver’s license on May 7, 2021, that he had attempted to see his dependent at a grandparent’s home, but was intercepted by people there, and that once his license was returned, he was going to drive to the hospital for treatment. Defendant does not explain how this information should be applied to his appeal. Nonetheless, we have undertaken an examination of the entire record pursuant to Wende, and our review of the record did disclose that the trial court failed to impose a matching, stayed $300 probation revocation restitution fine as required by Penal Code section 1202.44. (See People v. Hunt (2013) 213 Cal.App.4th 13, 19-20 [trial court must impose matching probation revocation restitution fine when imposing a sentence for…