P. v. Ketchum
Filed 3/24/09 P. v. Ketchum 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
(Sacramento)
----
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOHNNY LEE KETCHUM, Defendant and Appellant. | C059049 (Super. Ct. No. 07F05098) |
Suspecting that defendant Johnny Lee Ketchum was the parolee-at-large for whom they were looking, police stopped his car and directed defendant to keep his hands up. Defendant resisted and tried escape. Officers seized and searched him, finding a loaded .38 caliber handgun in his possession.
Defendant entered a negotiated plea of no contest to being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm (Pen. Code 12021; further section references are to this code), admitted he had a prior serious felony conviction ( 667, subds. (b)-(i)), and stipulated to the imposition of a term of six years in prison (the upper term of three years, doubled due to the prior serious felony conviction) in exchange for the dismissal of other charges, including a second prior conviction allegation.
Defendant later made a Marsden motion (People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118) and a motion to withdraw his plea. The trial court denied both motions, imposed the stipulated sentence, awarded defendant 505 days of custody credit, and ordered him to pay a restitution fine of $800 ( 1202.4), another restitution fine of $800, stayed unless parole is revoked ( 1202.45), a $20 court security fee ( 1465.8), a $222.29 main jail booking fee, and a $27.22 main jail classification fee. He was also ordered to provide a DNA sample pursuant to section 296.
Defendant appealed. His request for certificate of probable cause was denied.
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. At the request of appointed counsel, the trial court amended the abstract of judgment to reflect that the court imposed a $222.29 (not $242.29) main jail booking fee.
Counsel then filed an opening brief in this court that sets forth the facts of the case and asks us to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant.
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no other arguable error in favor of defendant.
The judgment is affirmed.
SCOTLAND , P. J.
We concur:
BLEASE , J.
ROBIE , J.
Publication courtesy of San Diego free legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Santee Property line attorney.
