P. v. Coleman

Filed 2/16/06 P. v. Coleman CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE COURT^*

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County. Hurl W. Johnson, Judge.

Gregory M. Chappel, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Assistant Attorney General, and Charles A. French, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

-ooOoo-

On February 7, 2005, appellant Michael Wayne Coleman was convicted by a jury of violating Penal Code section 459^[1] as alleged in count 1 and of violating section 496, subdivision (a) as alleged in count 2.

On February 9, 2005, the matter came on for court trial on the prior conviction allegations. At that time, the court also considered another case pending against Coleman (Case No. 1073178). Pursuant to an agreed upon disposition of both cases, after having been fully apprised of his rights and the consequences of his plea, Coleman then admitted the prior conviction allegations as alleged in the information . In compliance with the agreed upon disposition, the court sentenced Coleman to serve the mid-term of two years on count 1 and a consecutive term of eight months (one-third the mid-term) on count 2. The court then imposed three one-year consecutive terms for each of the prior conviction allegations alleged pursuant to section 667.5, subdivision (b) for a total sentence of 5 years, 8 months. The court ordered Coleman to provide a DNA sample and to pay a $500 restitution fine pursuant to section 1202.4, subdivision (b) and an additional restitution fine of $500 pursuant to section 1204.4, which was suspended.

Coleman's appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which summarizes the pertinent facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks that this court independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) The opening brief includes appellate counsel's declaration indicating that Coleman was advised he could file his own brief with this court. By letter dated October 25, 2005, we invited Coleman to submit additional briefing. Coleman submitted, by letter received November 9, 2005, arguments related to routine evidentiary rulings.

Our independent review of the record and of the arguments in Coleman's letter discloses no reasonably arguable legal or factual appellate issues.

The judgment is affirmed.

Publication courtesy of Poway Migration Law Attorney (http://www.mcmillanlaw.us/) And Poway Lawyers Directory ( http://www.fearnotlaw.com/ )

^* Before Vartabedian, Acting P.J., Cornell, J. and Gomes, J.

^[1] All subsequent statutory references are to the Penal Code.