P. v. Mills
Filed 8/15/06 P. v. Mills CA4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Butte)
----
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. EDWARD DERRELL MILLS, Defendant and Appellant. |
C051445
(Super. Ct. No. CM020646)
|
Defendant Edward Derrell Mills entered a negotiated plea of no contest to lewd and lascivious conduct upon a child under the age of 14 years (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a)) in exchange for dismissal of the remaining counts (continuous sexual abuse and sexual exploitation, a misdemeanor) with a waiver pursuant to People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754.
The trial court denied probation and sentenced defendant to state prison for the upper term of eight years, imposed a $1,600 restitution fine, a $1,600 parole revocation restitution fine, a $700 sex offender fine which included penalty assessments and a $20 court security fee, ordered defendant to register as a sex offender, reserved jurisdiction over victim restitution and awarded a total of 56 days of presentence custody credit.
Defendant appeals.
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court 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.
Defendant filed a letter brief claiming that the probation report misled the trial court in concluding that defendant was not a suitable candidate for probation. He argues that the probation report erroneously reports that his performance on a prior grant of probation was poor when in fact he had completed all grants of probation but one which he did not complete because he was taken into custody. He also expresses remorse.
â€
