People v. Miner CA3

Filed 4/30/26 P. v. Miner CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Placer)

THE PEOPLE, C104094 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 62-181435) v. BRADLEY RUSSELL MINER, Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Bradley Russell Miner filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable errors that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND In 2016, the mother of victim J.M.1 reported to law enforcement that defendant had inappropriately touched J.M. In an interview, J.M. said that defendant inappropriately touched her on four separate occasions.

1 To protect their privacy, we will refer to the victims by their initials. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.90(b)(4).)

A separate victim, S.M., told law enforcement that defendant had touched her inappropriately on several occasions.

In 2020, the mother of a third victim, N.B., reported that defendant had sexually assaulted N.B. years prior. In an interview, N.B. reported several incidents that occurred when she was eight or nine years old.

The People charged defendant with seven counts of lewd act upon a child (Pen.

Code, § 288, subd. (a)),2 one count of oral copulation upon a child 10 years of age or younger (§ 288.7, subd. (b)), and one count of sexual intercourse and sodomy with a child 10 years of age or younger (§ 288.7, subd. (a)). The People alleged that defendant committed these offenses against multiple victims (§ 667.61, subds. (b), (c), (e)(4)) and that, as to certain offenses, defendant committed the offenses upon a victim under 14 years of age and against multiple victims (§ 667.61, subd. (j)(2)).

At a hearing on May 31, 2023, the trial court granted defendant’s Marsden motion. (See People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118.)

Defendant ultimately pled guilty to oral copulation upon a child 10 years of age or younger and two counts of lewd act upon a child and admitted to the multiple victims allegation as to one of the counts of lewd act upon a child. The trial court sentenced defendant to 15 years to life for oral copulation upon a child 10 years of age or younger; a concurrent term of 15 years to life for one of the counts of lewd act upon a child; and six years (the middle term) for the other count of lewd act upon a child.

Defendant timely appealed without requesting a certificate of probable cause.

DISCUSSION Appointed counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts and procedural history of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there

2 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. are any arguable issues on appeal. (See 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, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.

\s\ KRAUSE, Acting P. J.

We concur:

\s\ BOULWARE EURIE, J.

\s\ WISEMAN, J.*

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