Filed 12/19/25 P. v. Umathum CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D085708 Plaintiff and Respondent, v. (Super. Ct. No. SWF2201063) KRISTEN CORRINE UMATHUM, Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Riverside County, Stephen J. Gallon, Judge. Affirmed.

Siri Shetty, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

This appeal is from a judgment following a guilty plea. Kristen Corrine Umathum entered into a plea agreement with a stipulated sentence.

Umathum pleaded guilty to one count of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence (Pen. Code, § 191.5, subd. (a); count 2), one count of driving under the influence of a controlled substance (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (f); count 3) and admitted the great bodily injury allegation (Pen. Code, § 12022.7, subd. (a)).

The parties agreed the aggregate sentence for both counts and allegations would be a determinate term of 27 years four months, which the court ultimately imposed.

Umathum filed a timely notice of appeal.

Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 indicating appellate counsel has not been able to identify any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to independently review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered Umathum the opportunity to file her own brief on appeal, but she has not responded.

STATEMENT OF FACTS Since this appeal is from a judgment following a guilty plea, a summary of the factual basis will suffice.

At approximately 9:50 p.m. on December 19, 2020, a truck driven by Umathum collided head-on with a car driven by E.F. E.F. sustained severe injuries , and her eight-year-old son Z.F., who had been sitting in the back seat, was later pronounced dead.

DISCUSSION As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks the court to independently review the record for error. To assist the court in its review, and in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel has identified a possible issue that was considered in evaluating the potential merits of this appeal: Did the court sentence Umathum in accordance with the plea agreement?

We have independently reviewed the record as required by Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal.

Competent counsel has represented Umathum on this appeal.

DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.

HUFFMAN, J. WE CONCUR:

MCCONNELL, P. J.

O’ROURKE, J.

 Retired Associate Justice of the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.