Opinion
H045327
07-13-2018
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CHRISTOPHER SEAN MULLIS, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Santa Cruz County Super. Ct. No. 17CR06209)
Defendant Christopher Sean Mullis pleaded guilty to making criminal threats (Pen. Code, § 422). The court placed him on probation for a term of three years, and ordered him to serve 365 days in county jail.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
On appeal, defendant's appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) that raises no issue. We notified defendant of his right to submit written argument on this own behalf within 30 days. The 30-day period has elapsed and we have not received written argument from defendant.
Pursuant to Wende, we have reviewed the entire record and find that there is no arguable issue on appeal. We affirm the judgment.
I. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE
Because defendant pleaded guilty, we derive the facts from the probation report included in the record.
On September 27, 2017, defendant was outside of the Cigar Palace in Soquel holding two knives and threatening customers. Albert Maida, an employee of the Cigar Palace, saw defendant threatening customers. Maida went outside to ask defendant to leave, and defendant said, "What the fuck are you looking at? I'm going to stab your eyes out and stab you." At the time he threatened Maida, defendant was holding two knives with the blades pointing upward. Maida believed defendant's threats were credible, and he feared for his safety.
On September 28, 2017, defendant was charged with making criminal threats (§ 422; count one); and exhibiting a deadly weapon (§ 417, subd. (a)(1); count two.) On October 20, 2017, defendant pleaded guilty to making criminal threats with the understanding that count two would be dismissed, and that he would receive probation.
On November 17, 2017, the court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on probation for a period of three years. The court ordered defendant to serve 365 days in county jail with 52 days of credit for actual time served. The minute order from the sentencing hearing did not reflect that defendant received conduct credits pursuant to § 4019, subdivision (c), nor did it reflect that count two was dismissed pursuant to the plea agreement.
On April 3, 2018, appellate counsel sent a letter to the trial court requesting that defendant be awarded 26 days of conduct credit, and that count two be dismissed. On April 4, 2018, appellate counsel sent a follow-up letter to the trial court stating that her letter requesting 26 days of conduct credit was incorrect, and that defendant should be awarded 52 days of conduct credit for a total of 104 days. On April 13, 2018, the court corrected the November 17, 2017 order to reflect that defendant received a total of 104 days of credit for time served (52 days of actual time and 52 days of conduct credit pursuant to § 4019, subd. (c)), and that count two was dismissed. --------
Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal on December 4, 2017.
II. DISCUSSION
We have conducted an independent review of the record pursuant to Wende, and find that there is no arguable issue on appeal.
III. DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
/s/_________
Greenwood, P.J. WE CONCUR: /s/_________
Bamattre-Manoukian, J. /s/_________
Grover, J.