Court Opinion

ID: 9397149
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-24 17:04:31.580061+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:21.872549
License: Public Domain

Filed 5/24/23 P. v. Galea CA3
                                           NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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
                                      THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
                                                       (Amador)
                                                            ----

 THE PEOPLE,                                                                                   C096856

                    Plaintiff and Respondent,                                    (Super. Ct. No. 22CR31700)

           v.

 MATTHEW DAVID GALEA,

                    Defendant and Appellant.

         Appointed counsel for defendant Matthew David Galea asked this court to conduct
an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues
on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 839.) Finding no arguable error that
would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment.

                                                   BACKGROUND
         In June 2022, the People charged defendant with hit and run driving resulting in
death or serious injury to another person. (Veh. Code, § 20001, subd. (b)(2).) The

                                                             1
People also alleged three aggravating circumstances related to the crime and four related
to the defendant. Defendant pleaded guilty to hit and run and admitted the seven
aggravating factors.
       The court presented the factual basis for the plea: On or about May 18, 2022,
defendant was driving a vehicle when he struck a person, causing them “death and
serious injury.” Defendant failed to stop after striking the victim. He failed to provide
reasonable assistance to the victim and failed to give his identifying information to the
victim or to law enforcement at the scene. Defendant also failed to report the accident.
Defense counsel joined in the plea.
       At sentencing, the trial court denied probation and sentenced defendant to the
upper term of four years in state prison. The court imposed various fines and fees,
ordered defendant to pay restitution, and awarded defendant 84 days of custody credit.
Defendant appeals his conviction without a certificate of probable cause. Appointed
counsel submitted a Fares letter to the trial court, in response to which the trial court
amended the judgment nunc pro tunc to reflect the correct fines and fees.

                                        DISCUSSION
       We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening
brief that sets forth the facts and procedural history of the case and requests this court to
review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal.
(People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of his right
to file a supplemental brief within 30 days from the date the opening brief was filed.
More than 30 days have elapsed, and defendant has not filed a supplemental brief.
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record pursuant to Wende, we find no
arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
       Accordingly, we affirm the judgment.

                                              2
                                 DISPOSITION
     The judgment is affirmed.

                                          HULL, Acting P. J.

We concur:

DUARTE, J.

EARL, J.

                                      3