P. v. Ramey
Filed 5/10/06 P. v. Ramey CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. THOMAS JERRY RAMEY III, Defendant and Appellant. | G035641 (Super. Ct. No. 04HF1222) O P I N I O N |
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Robert R. Fitzgerald, Retired Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.) Affirmed.
Howard C. Cohen, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
* * *
We appointed counsel to represent THOMAS JERRY RAMEY III on appeal. Counsel filed a brief which set forth the facts of the case. Counsel did not argue against RAMEY, but advised the court no issues were found to argue on his behalf. We have examined the record and found no arguable issue. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) RAMEY was given 30 days to file written argument in his own behalf. That period has passed, and we have received no communication from him.
The judgment is affirmed.
___________________________
SILLS, P. J.
WE CONCUR:
___________________________
RYLAARSDAM, J.
___________________________
FYBEL, J.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney referral.
Analysis and review provided by Vista Apartment Manager Lawyers.
