P. v. Barranco
Filed 8/8/06 P. v. Barranco CA6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CLEMENTE BARRANCO, Defendant and Appellant. | H029606 (Santa Cruz County Super. Ct. No. F11689) |
On August 19, 2005, after a stipulated court trial based on the police report of defendant's arrest, defendant was found guilty of transportation of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (a)). The court also found true the special allegation that defendant was armed with a firearm in the commission of this felony (Pen. Code, § 12022, subd. (c)). At the time of sentencing on October 7, 2005, other counts were dismissed, the court suspended imposition of sentence, and placed defendant on probation with county jail time along with other terms and conditions.
We appointed counsel to represent defendant in this court. Appointed counsel has filed an opening brief which states the case and the facts but raises no specific issues. We have notified defendant of his right to submit written argument in his own behalf within 30 days. The period has elapsed and we have received no written argument from defendant.
Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we have reviewed the entire record, including the augmented record, and have concluded that there is no arguable issue on appeal.
The judgment is affirmed.
__________________________________________
McAdams, J.
WE CONCUR:
________________________________
Bamattre-Manoukian, Acting P.J.
________________________________
Mihara, J.
Publication courtesy of California pro bono legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by La Mesa Real Estate Attorney.
