legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Ortiz

P. v. Ortiz
08:10:2006

P. v. Ortiz



Filed 8/8/06 P. v. Ortiz CA1/4







NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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



FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT



DIVISION FOUR










THE PEOPLE,


Plaintiff and Respondent,


v.


GUY MITCHELL ORTIZ,


Defendant and Appellant.



A112696


(San Mateo County


Super. Ct. No. SC045960)



Pursuant to a negotiated disposition, appellant Guy Mitchell Ortiz pled no contest to receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a)) and admitted two state prison priors (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). He was sentenced to five years in state prison (upper term of three years plus two years for priors), execution of that sentence was suspended and appellant was granted probation on certain terms and conditions.


Subsequently, a motion to revoke probation was filed alleging that appellant had used a controlled substance and had threatened to kill his former girlfriend. A contested hearing on the motion was held, at the conclusion of which the trial court found the alleged violations to be true. Probation was formally revoked and the previously suspended state prison sentence was ordered executed.


Counsel for appellant has filed an opening brief raising no issues and asking this court for an independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. We have conducted the requested review and conclude that there are no arguable issues.


Appellant was represented throughout the proceedings by counsel. The evidence adduced at the hearing was sufficient to support the trial court's findings that appellant violated the conditions of his probation. There was no abuse of discretion by the trial court in revoking probation and ordering the suspended sentence into effect.


Judgment affirmed.


_________________________


Reardon, J.


We concur:


_________________________


Ruvolo, P.J.


_________________________


Rivera, J.


Publication Courtesy of San Diego County Legal Resource Directory.


Analysis and review provided by El Cajon Real Estate Attorney.





Description Pursuant to a negotiated disposition, appellant pled no contest to receiving stolen property and admitted two state prison priors.Subsequently, a motion to revoke probation was filed alleging that appellant had used a controlled substance and had threatened to kill his former girlfriend. A contested hearing on the motion was held, at the conclusion of which the trial court found the alleged violations to be true. Probation was formally revoked and the previously suspended state prison sentence was ordered executed.Counsel for appellant has filed an opening brief raising no issues and asking this court for an independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.

Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale