People v. Bates CA1/4 ( 2023 )


Menu:
  • Filed 5/31/23 P. v. Bates CA1/4
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or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 FOUR
    THE PEOPLE,
    Plaintiff and Respondent,
    A166798
    v.
    RONALD ARLEN BATES, JR.                                                (Del Norte County
    Superior Court No.
    Defendant and Appellant.
    CRF21-9475)
    Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant Ronald Arlen Bates, Jr.
    entered a no contest plea to one felony count of assault with force likely to
    cause great bodily injury. He was sentenced to the low term of two years in
    state prison with credit for having served 88 days in custody, and the court
    imposed various fines and fees. The court further ordered defendant to pay
    direct restitution of $76.96 to the County of Del Norte, representing the cost
    of repairing the county vehicle defendant had damaged.
    Defendant’s counsel has filed an opening brief asking that we conduct
    an independent review of the record for arguable issues—i.e., those that are
    not frivolous, as required by People v. Wende (1979) 
    25 Cal.3d 436
     (Wende).
    Counsel also informed defendant of his right to file a supplemental brief on
    his own behalf, but defendant did not do so.
    Finding no arguable issues, we shall affirm.
    1
    BACKGROUND
    Defendant was originally charged with one felony count of assault with
    a deadly weapon. During the preliminary hearing, a county worker testified
    that defendant became enraged by the worker’s advisement that defendant
    could not camp on county property in an unlicensed vehicle. Upon hearing
    this statement, defendant said, “What are you going to do about it?” and
    threw a rock near the worker’s head, breaking the window of the county truck
    the worker was driving. After the preliminary hearing, the People filed an
    information charging defendant with the same felony count and an additional
    misdemeanor count of vandalism.
    Defendant subsequently agreed to plead no contest to an amended
    felony count of assault with force likely to cause great bodily injury (instead
    of assault with a deadly weapon), in exchange for dismissal of the
    misdemeanor vandalism charge and a sentence not to exceed the low term of
    two years in state prison.1 As part of the plea deal, defendant agreed that the
    court could order restitution and consider the preliminary hearing transcript
    as the factual basis for the plea.
    The trial court ordered a presentence investigation report, which
    defendant received. The court found defendant to be unsuited for probation
    based on defendant’s 18 prior convictions, the increasing severity of his acts
    of violence, and his poor performance on multiple prior grants of probation.
    The court therefore sentenced defendant to the low term of two years with
    custody credits and various fines and fees. The court also ordered restitution
    1
    At the same time and in connection with a separate case, defendant
    entered a no contest plea to a misdemeanor count of resisting an executive
    officer in violation of Penal Code section 69. That misdemeanor case is not at
    issue in this appeal.
    2
    in the amount of $76.96, representing the cost of repairing the damaged truck
    window.
    DISCUSSION
    Pursuant to Wende, we have conducted an independent review of the
    record to determine whether there are any arguable issues that merit
    discussion. We find none. There was a factual basis for the plea, defendant
    was advised of his rights and waived them, the court selected an appropriate
    sentence, and the restitution order was supported.
    DISPOSITION
    The judgment is affirmed.
    BROWN, P. J.
    WE CONCUR:
    STREETER, J.
    FINEMAN, J.
    People v. Bates (A166798)
    
    Judge of the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo,
    assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the
    California Constitution.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: A166798

Filed Date: 5/31/2023

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 6/1/2023