Filed 2/20/24 P. v. Hamilton CA1/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, A169266 v. ARMOND HAMILTON, (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. 16-CR-013773B) Defendant and Appellant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

In October 2022, as a result of a plea bargain, Armond Hamilton pled no contest to a charge of voluntary manslaughter with a firearm use enhancement. (Pen. Code, §§ 192, subd. (a), 12022.5, subd. (a).) The trial court sentenced him to 15 years in prison, and it reserved as to restitution. In October 2023 — pursuant to the parties’ stipulation — the court ordered Hamilton to pay $7,500 in restitution to the California Victim Compensation Board to reimburse it for payments made from the Restitution Fund. Hamilton appeals the restitution order. (We exercise our discretion to construe his appeal as having been filed after entry of the order for victim restitution on November 28, 2023. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule

1 We resolve this case by memorandum opinion. (Cal. Stds. Jud. Admin., § 8.1.)

1 8.104(d)(2).)) His appointed counsel filed a brief raising no issues and asking this court to conduct an independent review of the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Hamilton was apprised of his right to file a supplemental brief; he has not filed anything. We have independently reviewed the record for arguable issues. Having found none, we affirm. (Wende, at p. 441.)

DISPOSITION

The trial court’s order for victim restitution is affirmed.

2 _________________________

RODRÍGUEZ, J.

WE CONCUR:

_________________________

TUCHER, P. J.

_________________________

PETROU, J.

A169266

3