legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Smith

P. v. Smith
09:14:2007



P. v. Smith



Filed 9/10/07 P. v. Smith CA4/2



NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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





FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT





DIVISION TWO



THE PEOPLE,



Plaintiff and Respondent,



v.



ANTHONY DEMORIEO SMITH,



Defendant and Appellant.



E042454



(Super.Ct.No. INF055096)



OPINION



APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Richard A. Erwood, Judge. Affirmed.



Michelle C. Rogers, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.



No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.



On December 1, 2006, in case No. INF055096, defendant, represented by counsel, pled guilty to counts one (Pen. Code, 459, burglary),[1]three ( 496(a), receiving stolen property), four ( 466, possession of burglary tools) and five ( 488, theft of personal property).



Thereafter, defendant was committed to state prison for two years less custody credits and the special allegation was stricken on motion of the district attorney and in the interests of justice pursuant to section 1385.



Defendant appealed, and upon his request this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493] setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record.



We offered the defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.



We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.



Disposition



The judgment is affirmed.



NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS



RAMIREZ



P.J.



We concur:



HOLLENHORST



J.



GAUT



J.



Publication Courtesy of California attorney referral.



Analysis and review provided by Vista Property line attorney.







[1] All further references are to the Penal Code.





Description On December 1, 2006, in case No. INF055096, defendant, represented by counsel, pled guilty to counts one (Pen. Code, 459, burglary),[1]three ( 496(a), receiving stolen property), four ( 466, possession of burglary tools) and five ( 488, theft of personal property).
Thereafter, defendant was committed to state prison for two years less custody credits and the special allegation was stricken on motion of the district attorney and in the interests of justice pursuant to section 1385.We offered the defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done. Court have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues. The judgment is affirmed.





Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale