Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

PEOPLE v. DANIELS, B230016. (2011)

Court: Court of Appeals of California Number: incaco20111004033 Visitors: 42
Filed: Oct. 04, 2011
Latest Update: Oct. 04, 2011
Summary: NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS JOHNSON, J. On June 14, 2010, Los Angeles deputy sheriffs responded to a suicide hotline call from an unknown woman in a campground near Castaic Lake. The woman threatened to commit suicide with a razor blade and, possibly, a shotgun. Sheriff's deputies subsequently found defendant sitting in the cab of her truck at a campsite with the door open, talking on her phone. The officers drew their weapons and kept them drawn during the entire encounter. D
More

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

JOHNSON, J.

On June 14, 2010, Los Angeles deputy sheriffs responded to a suicide hotline call from an unknown woman in a campground near Castaic Lake. The woman threatened to commit suicide with a razor blade and, possibly, a shotgun. Sheriff's deputies subsequently found defendant sitting in the cab of her truck at a campsite with the door open, talking on her phone. The officers drew their weapons and kept them drawn during the entire encounter.

Defendant was distraught and spoke of being in a lot of pain and wanting treatment. The officers repeatedly ordered defendant to get out of her truck; she refused to comply, and made frequent furtive movements in parts of the truck outside the officers' sight. Defendant yelled at the deputies, "`Go ahead and shoot me. Just shoot me'" and "`kill me.'"

After 30 minutes, a deputy sprayed pepper spray into defendant's face. Defendant put her truck into reverse, and drove into a squad car. She drove back and forward several times in order to turn it around and drive away, causing officers to scatter to avoid being hit. Defendant began driving out of the campground, towards fire and medical personnel and some hikers. Officers fired shots at the tires and eventually stopped defendant's truck and took her into custody.

An information charged defendant with three counts of assault with a deadly weapon on a peace officer (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (c)); one count of resisting an executive officer (Pen. Code, § 69); and one count of reckless driving (Veh. Code, § 23103, subd. (a)). Defendant also faced a violation of the summary probation granted to her in a 2008 case. The trial court granted defendant's request to proceed in pro per. Defendant accepted the prosecution's plea offer and pleaded nolo contendere to count four of the information, resisting an executive officer (Pen. Code, § 69).

In accordance with the plea agreement, the court suspended defendant's sentence and granted her three years formal probation. As conditions of probation, defendant was required to serve 246 days in county jail (time served), and to meet with an independent mental health professional and abide by that person's recommendations. Defendant filed a notice of appeal and a request for a certificate of probable cause on December 22, 2010. Her request for a certificate of probable cause was denied on December 30, 2010.

We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues and requesting that this court independently review the record. On April 29, 2011, we advised defendant she had 30 days within which to personally submit a brief or letter raising any contentions or issues she wished us to consider. To date, we have received no response.

Defendant's no contest plea and failure to obtain a certificate of probable cause limit the scope of her potential appeal to "[g]rounds that arose after entry of the plea and do not affect the plea's validity" or "[t]he denial of a motion to suppress evidence under Penal Code section 1538.5." (Pen. Code, § 1237.5; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b)(1)(B), (b)(4)(A).) We have examined the record and have found no arguable issues, let alone issues that are cognizable without a certificate of probable cause. We are satisfied that defendant's attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 109-110; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)

DISPOSITION

The appeal is dismissed.

ROTHSCHILD, Acting P. J. and CHANEY, J., concurs.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer