P. v. Foley

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed 10/3/13 
P. v. Foley CA5

 

 

 

 

 

 

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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.

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

 
>

THE PEOPLE,   Plaintiff and Respondent,                           v.   JAMES MICHAEL FOLEY,   Defendant and Appellant.

F065508   (Super. Ct. No. F11902428)   OPINION

 

THE COURThref="#_ftn1"
name="_ftnref1" title="">^*

            APPEAL from
a judgment of the Superior Court of href="http://www.adrservices.org/neutrals/frederick-mandabach.php">Fresno
County.  Brant K. Bramer,
Commissioner.

            Deborah
Prucha, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

            Office of
the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and
Respondent.

-ooOoo-




INTRODUCTION

            On June 21,
2011, appellant, James Michael Foley, waived his href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.com/">constitutional rights pursuant to >Boykin v. Alabama (1969) 395 U.S. 238 and In
re Tahl (1969) 1 Cal.3d 122 and pled no contest to one count of href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">possession of illegal substances in a jail
facility (Pen. Code, § 4573.6).href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" title="">^[1]  Appellant also admitted a prior serious
felony conviction within the meaning of the three strikes law (§§ 667,
subds. (b)-(i) & 1170.12) and multiple prior prison term enhancements
(§ 667.5, subd. (b)). 

            On July 22,
2011, the trial court struck the prior serious felony conviction pursuant to
section 1385 and People v. >Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497. 
The court struck the prior prison term enhancements and imposed a
sentence of three years for possession of illegal substances in a jail
facility.  The court ordered appellant’s
sentence to be served concurrently with his sentence for a conviction in an
unrelated case.  The court granted
appellant 54 days of custody credits for time served in jail and conduct
credits of 26 days for total custody
credits of 80 days.  The court
imposed a $200 restitution fine. 

            On June 4,
2012, appellant filed a motion in the trial court requesting a recalculation of
his presentence custody credits seeking additional conduct credits.  The trial court denied appellant’s motion on
June 27, 2012.  Appellant appealed the
trial court’s denial of his motion. 
Appellate counsel has filed a brief for independent review of the case
by this court pursuant to href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.com/">People v. Wende
(1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). 

APPELLATE COURT REVIEW

            Appellant’s
appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief that summarizes the
pertinent facts, raises no issues, and requests this court to review the record
independently.  (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d
436.)  The opening brief also includes
the declaration of appellate counsel indicating that appellant was advised he
could file his own brief with this court. 
By letter on October 29, 2012, we invited appellant to submit additional
briefing.  To date, he has not done so.

            After
independent review of the record, we have concluded there are no reasonably href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">arguable legal or factual issues.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is
affirmed.