Court Opinion

ID: 9940328
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-13 23:02:16.034926+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:44:47.023038
License: Public Domain

Filed 2/13/24 P. v. Smith CA4/2
                      NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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

                                   FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

                                                 DIVISION TWO

 THE PEOPLE,
                                                                         E081778
          Plaintiff and Respondent,
                                                                         (Super.Ct.No. RIF2300627)
 v.
                                                                         OPINION
 GARDINER BOSEY SMITH III,

          Defendant and Appellant.

         APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Gary Polk, Judge.

Affirmed.

         Jo Pastore, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and

Appellant.

         No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

         In 2023, Gardiner Bosey Smith pled guilty to assault with force likely to produce

great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4)) and admitted that he personally

inflicted great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 12022.7, subd. (a)). Per a plea agreement, the

                                                             1
court sentenced him to three years formal probation and 140 days of custody, but

awarded him credit for 140 days of time-served. Smith appealed, and in the notice of

appeal indicated he was appealing “sentencing, falsifying information.” Smith did not

obtain a certificate of probable cause.

       We appointed counsel to represent Smith on appeal, and counsel has filed a brief

under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California

(1967) 386 U.S. 738, setting forth a statement of the case and a summary of the facts and

asking us to conduct an independent review of the record. Counsel’s brief did not raise

any issues for our consideration. We offered Smith an opportunity to file a personal

supplemental brief, and he has not done so.

       We have independently reviewed the record for potential error as required by

People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106 and find no arguable error that would result in a

disposition more favorable to Smith.

                                       DISPOSITION

       We affirm the judgment.

       NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

                                                              RAPHAEL
                                                                                          J.

We concur:

RAMIREZ
                        P. J.

McKINSTER
                           J.

                                              2