People v. Edwards CA4/2 ( 2024 )

Filed 10/4/24 P. v. Edwards 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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,
Plaintiff and Respondent, E083036
v. (Super. Ct. No. INF2000487)
BRIAN ANTHONY EDWARDS, OPINION
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Stephen J. Gallon, Judge.
Affirmed.
Janice R. Mazur, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
1
I.
INTRODUCTION
Defendant and appellant Brian Anthony Edwards appeals the sentence imposed
after this court affirmed his judgment of conviction, vacated defendant’s sentence in part,
and remanded the matter for resentencing. Appointed 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, requesting this court to conduct an independent review of the record to
determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. In addition, defendant has
had an opportunity to file a supplemental brief with this court and has not done so. After
reviewing the record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more
favorable to defendant and affirm the judgment.
II.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Defendant severely beat and tortured his wife in front of their young daughters.
During the abuse, defendant threatened to kill his wife while using both his fists to
pommel his wife’s face, an HDMI cord to whip her, and an aluminum baseball bat to
strike his wife’s leg, arm, and right side of her head. Defendant’s abuse caused his wife
to suffer a fractured nose, lacerations on her eye, swelling on her face, welts on her arm,
2
and severe bruising on her left leg. (See People v. Edwards (May 23, 2023, E077753)
1
[nonpub. opn.] (Edwards I).)
A jury convicted defendant of torture (Pen. Code, § 206; count 1), assault with a
deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1); count 2), inflicting corporal injury on a
spouse (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (f)(2); count 3), false imprisonment (Pen. Code, § 236;
count 4), and making criminal threats (Pen. Code, § 422; count 5). The trial court
sentenced defendant to a term of seven years to life for count 1, a consecutive term of
eight months for count 4, and a consecutive term of two years for count 5. The court
stayed the sentences on counts 2 and 3 under Penal Code section 654, but denied
defendant’s request under Penal Code section 654 to stay the sentence on the false
imprisonment and criminal threats counts (counts 4 & 5). (Edwards I, supra, E077753.)
Defendant subsequently appealed. He argued the trial court erred in failing to stay
his sentences on the false imprisonment and criminal threats counts (counts 4 & 5) under
Penal Code section 654 and that the matter must be remanded for resentencing under
recently enacted legislation. (Edwards I, supra, E077753.) We affirmed the judgment of
conviction and the trial court’s decision to not stay the sentences on counts 4 and 5,
vacated the sentences on counts 1, 2 and 3, and remanded the matter for a full
resentencing hearing in light of recently enacted legislation. (Ibid.)
1
We took judicial notice of our prior opinion from defendant’s first appeal, case
No. E077753.
3
On January 11, 2024, following issuance of the remittitur, the People filed a post-
remittitur sentencing Brief.
The resentencing hearing was held on January 12, 2024. Following argument by
the parties and a statement by defendant, the trial court denied defendant probation and
sentenced him to the same term it has previously imposed: seven years to life for count 1,
a consecutive middle term of two years for count 5, and a consecutive middle term of
eight months for count 4. The court stayed the sentences on counts 2 and 3 under Penal
Code section 654, but denied defendant’s request to stay the sentence on the false
imprisonment and criminal threats counts (counts 4 & 5). The total term imposed was an
indeterminate term of seven years to life, plus a determinate term of two years, eight
months. Defendant timely appealed.
III.
DISCUSSION
After defendant appealed, upon his request, this court appointed counsel to
represent him. Upon examination of the record, counsel has filed a brief under the
authority of People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California, supra, 386
U.S. 738, setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts and potential
arguable issues and requesting this court to conduct an independent review of the record.
Counsel has identified potential issues of whether the trial court erred in finding
defendant was ineligible for probation and declining to stay his sentences on counts 4 and
5 pursuant to Penal Code section 654.
4
We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, but he
has not done so.
An appellate court conducts a review of the entire record to determine whether the
record reveals any issues which, if resolved favorably to defendant, would result in
reversal or modification of the judgment. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at pp. 441-
442; People v. Feggans (1967) 67 Cal.2d 444, 447-448; Anders v. California, supra, 386
U.S. at p. 744; see People v. Johnson (1981) 123 Cal.App.3d 106, 109-112.)
Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have
independently reviewed the entire record for potential error and find no arguable error
that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
IV.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
CODRINGTON
Acting P. J.
We concur:
FIELDS
J.
RAPHAEL
J.
5