DUI Lawyers Directory. Search for a dui lawyer near you. Operating a vehicle while drinking could cause judicial actions.
 Zip Code Search for DUI Lawyers
Defending Alleged Drunk Driving Criminal Acts Read about successful dui defense cases from member dui lawyers Read about successful dui defense cases from member dui lawyers Membership at DUI Defenders Discuss issues related to dui/dwi/owi Contact Us about a DUI Lawyer
facebook.com/MyDUI

  to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.

People v. Tymkowicz

10/25/2001

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS


California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.


Brian Tymkowicz appeals from a judgment of conviction entered upon a plea of guilty. Appellant's court-appointed counsel has briefed no issues and asks this court to review the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.


A first amended information filed in Humboldt County Superior Court charged appellant with driving under the influence of alcohol resulting in bodily injury (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (a)) and further alleged that appellant personally inflicted great bodily injury during the commission of the offense, a sentencing enhancement (Pen. Code, § 12022.7, subd. (a)).


Appellant pleaded guilty to driving under the influence of alcohol resulting in bodily injury (§ 23153, subd. (a)) and admitted the infliction of great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 12022.7, subd. (a)).


The court sentenced appellant to the aggravated term of three years in state prison for driving under influence of alcohol resulting in bodily injury (§ 23153, subd. (a)) and enhanced the sentence by three years for the infliction of great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 12022.7, subd. (a)). Thus, the aggregate term totaled six years. The court ordered appellant to pay a $6,351 restitution fine and granted him 187 days' total presentence credit.


Appellant was represented by counsel throughout the proceedings.


There was no sentencing error.


There are no issues that require further briefing.


The judgment is affirmed.


We concur:


Haerle, J.


Lambden, J.






Page 1 

California DUI Attorneys    DUI Lawyers


  to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.

FDP  |   RSS Feeds  |  Articles  |  Jobs  |  Leads  |  Partner Websites  |  Draeger FAQ
SiteMap | DUI Blog | DUI Lawyers | DUI Attorneys | Trading Partners | Member Agreement | Terms of Service
Attorneys Click Here | DUI Case Laws | FAQ | DUI Forum | Directory of DUI Attorneys | Success Stories  | Press Releases
Copyright © 2004. “DUI Defenders”. All rights reserved.