Opinion
B270541
10-26-2016
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JUAN CARLOS CARDENAS, Defendant and Appellant.
Joanna McKim, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. PA076101) APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Hayden Zacky, Judge. Affirmed. Joanna McKim, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
____________________
A jury convicted Juan Carlos Cardenas of the first degree murder of Rosa Figueroa and found true the special allegation he had used a deadly weapon when committing the crime. The jury also found Cardenas guilty of the attempted willful, deliberate and premeditated murder of Lisa Q. and found true the special allegations he had used a deadly weapon and inflicted great bodily injury on Lisa in the commission of the crime. The trial court sentenced Cardenas to 25 years to life for the murder plus one year for the use of a deadly weapon and imposed a consecutive life sentence for the attempted murder plus six years for the use of a deadly weapon and the infliction of great bodily injury. The court awarded Cardenas 340 actual days of presentence custody credit, ordered him to pay $8,151.58 in restitution to the surviving victim, imposed a $10,000 victim restitution fine and other mandatory fines, fees and assessments and imposed and stayed a parole revocation fine. (People v. Cardenas (Mar. 24, 2015, B254028) [nonpub. opn.])
After we affirmed his convictions on appeal, Cardenas moved to waive or reduce the $10,000 restitution fine. The trial court denied the motion on February 16, 2016.
Representing himself, Cardenas filed a notice of appeal on February 29, 2016. Although Cardenas indicated in the notice he was appealing from the judgment, it appears he is challenging the February 16, 2016 order denying his postjudgment motion.
We appointed counsel to represent Cardenas on appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised. On August 4, 2016 we advised Cardenas he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. We have not received a response.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied Cardenas's appellate attorney has fully complied with the responsibilities of counsel and no arguable issue exists. (See Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284 [120 S.Ct. 746, 145 L.Ed.2d 756]; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 118-119; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441-442.)
DISPOSITION
The order is affirmed.
PERLUSS, P. J. We concur:
ZELON, J.
Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution. --------