Opinion
G060285
01-24-2022
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. GONZALO SANTOS GONZALEZ, Defendant and Appellant.
Kristen Owen, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County No. 16NF2393 Julian W. Bailey. Affirmed.
Kristen Owen, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. 1
OPINION
O'LEARY, P. J.
We appointed counsel to represent Gonzalo Santos Gonzalez on appeal. Counsel filed a brief that set forth the facts of the case. Counsel did not argue against her client but advised the court she found no issues to argue on his behalf.
Counsel filed a brief following the procedures outlined in People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). The court in Wende explained a Wende brief is one that sets forth a summary of proceedings and facts but raises no specific issues. Under these circumstances, the court must conduct an independent review of the entire record. When the appellant himself raises specific issues in a Wende proceeding, we must expressly address them in our opinion and explain why they fail. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 120, 124.)
Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), to assist the court with its independent review, counsel provided the court with information as to issues that might arguably support an appeal. Counsel raised only one issue: whether the trial court erred in resentencing Gonzalez on remand.
We gave Gonzalez 30 days to file written argument on his own behalf. Thirty days have passed, and Gonzalez has not filed any written argument.
We have reviewed the record in accordance with our obligations under Wende and Anders, and we found no other arguable issues on appeal. We affirm the judgment.
FACTS
A jury convicted Gonzalez of two counts of sexual penetration of Victim 1, a child 10 years or younger (Pen. Code, § 288.7, subd. (b)) (counts 1 & 3), one count of committing a lewd act on Victim 1, a child under 14 years (§ 288, subd. (a)) (count 2), and two counts of committing a lewd act on Victim 2, a child under 14 years (§ 288, subd. (a)) (counts 4 & 5). The jury also found true all the special allegations. 2
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
The trial court sentenced Gonzalez to four consecutive terms of 15 years to life on counts 1, 3, 4, and 5 for a total prison term of 60 years to life. The court imposed a concurrent term of 15 years to life on count 2. Gonzalez timely appealed.
In an unpublished opinion, this court found there was insufficient evidence of corpus delicti as to count 3 and reversed the conviction as to that count and remanded the case for resentencing. (People v. Gonzalez (Jan. 29, 2021, G058691 [nonpub. opn.].)
On remand, the trial court sentenced Gonzalez to prison for 45 years to life (15 years to life consecutive on counts 1, 4, and 5). The court imposed a concurrent term on count 2 and dismissed count 3. Gonzalez timely appealed.
DISCUSSION
We have reviewed the record pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, and Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738, and considered the possible issue raised by appellate counsel. We found no arguable issues on appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
WE CONCUR: FYBEL, J., GOETHALS, J. 3