Filed 9/30/20 P. v. Arias CA2/8

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

PAMELA AMABEL ARIAS,

Defendant and Appellant.

B302274

(Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. MA069602)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los 

Angeles County, Shannon Knight, Judge. Affirmed.

Gordon B. Scott, under appointment by the Court of 

Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

——————————
2

We review this appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 

25 Cal.3d 436.

On October 12, 2016, Arias pled no contest to first degree 

burglary. On November 2, 2016, the trial court suspended 

imposition of sentence and placed Arias on formal probation for 

five years. The court ordered her to perform 60 days of 

community labor at the rate of two days per week and to make 

restitution to the victim. On September 26, 2018, upon Arias’s 

admission that she had violated probation, the court revoked and 

reinstated probation, directing her to participate in a 12-month 

drug treatment program with Project 180.

On October 2, 2019, the probation office advised the court 

that Arias had not complied with the conditions of probation: she 

had failed to provide proof of completion of Project 180; she had 

failed to provide proof of completion of 60 days of community 

service; she had not made any restitution payments. The court 

revoked her probation and set the case for a hearing.

On October 19, 2019, Arias admitted she had violated 

probation. The court terminated probation and sentenced her to 

two years in state prison, the low term for first degree burglary. 

The court imposed a $300 restitution fine; a $300 probation 

revocation fine; a $40 court operations assessment; a 

$30 conviction assessment; and a $300 parole fine, which the 

court stayed pending successful completion of parole. The court 

awarded 193 days of actual and conduct credit. Arias filed a 

timely notice of appeal.
3

We appointed counsel to represent Arias on appeal. After 

examining the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no 

issues and asking this court to review the record independently

as required by People v. Wende. Counsel also declared under 

penalty of perjury that he had advised his client in writing of the 

nature of the brief and of her right to file a supplemental brief on 

her own behalf.

On June 29, 2020, we advised Arias she had 30 days within 

which to personally submit any contentions or issues she wished 

us to consider. On August 7, 2020, the letter was returned to the 

court as undeliverable. On August 14, 2020, we sent appellant 

another letter dated August 14, 2020, advising her she had 30 

days from August 14, 2020 to file a supplemental brief. We have 

received no supplemental brief from appellant. 

We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that 

Arias’s counsel has fully complied with his responsibilities and 

that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 

at p. 441.)
4

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

STRATTON, J.

We concur:

GRIMES, Acting, P. J.

WILEY, J.