P. v. Brann

Filed 6/8/07 P. v. Brann CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Joan M. Borba, Judge. Affirmed.

James M. Crawford, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

In case number FVW13891, defendant pled guilty to two counts of receiving stolen property. (Pen. Code, 496, subd (a).) As part of his plea bargain, he waived his right to appeal. In case number FVW13892, defendant pled guilty to receiving stolen property and unlawfully taking/driving a vehicle. (Veh. Code, 10851, subd. (a).) In case number FVW13893, defendant pled guilty to selling/transporting marijuana. (Health & Saf. Code, 11360, subd. (a).) Defendant was granted probation, as agreed to in his plea bargains. Although defendant timely filed a notice of appeal in all three cases, the notice did not reach the appellate section of Superior Court until October, 2006, long after defendant had completed his probation. The trial court then granted defendants request for a certificate of probable cause, which had been authored in 1998, based on facts that existed at that time. A month later, the same trial court vacated defendants guilty pleas in all three cases, entered not guilty pleas, and dismissed all three cases pursuant to Penal Code section 1203.4.

Defendant appealed, and upon his request this court appointed counsel to represent him. 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 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493] setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record.

We offered the defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.

We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.

Dispostion

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

RAMIREZ

P.J.

We concur:

RICHLI

J.

MILLER

J.

Publication Courtesy of California free legal resources.

Analysis and review provided by Spring Valley Property line attorney.