Fear Not Law Articles: P. v. Sutton

P. v. Sutton

Filed 1/16/07 P. v. Sutton CA2/7

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SEVEN

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

CARL BERNARD SUTTON,

Defendant and Appellant.

B192301

(Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. TA083400)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County.

Arthur M. Lew, Judge. Affirmed.

John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

________________________

Carl Bernard Sutton appeals from the judgment entered following his negotiated no contest plea to robbery. He filed a timely notice of appeal on June 16, 2006, but he failed to obtain a certificate of probable cause.

We appointed counsel to represent him on appeal and directed counsel to file a letter brief explaining why the appeal should not be dismissed based on Sutton's failure to obtain a certificate of probable cause in challenging his plea. Counsel responded by moving for leave to file an amended notice of appeal. On October 12, 2006, we issued an order construing the notice of appeal filed on June 16, 2006, as an appeal based on grounds arising after the entry of the plea and not affecting the plea's validity.

Sutton approached Daryl Koonce near a bus stop, forcibly took Koonce's cellular phone, and threatened him with harm if he contacted police. Sutton was later arrested and charged by information with one count of robbery and one count of dissuading a witness from reporting a crime (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 136.1, subd. (b)(1)). As to both counts, the information specially alleged Sutton had suffered one prior serious felony conviction (robbery), making him eligible for sentencing under the â€

Description	Defendant appeals from the judgment entered following his negotiated no contest plea to robbery. Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal on June 16, 2006, but he failed to obtain a certificate of probable cause. Court have examined the entire record and are satisfied Defendant's attorney has fully complied with the responsibilities of counsel and no arguable issues exist. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284 [120 S.Ct. 746, 145 L.Ed.2d 756]; People v. Kelly (Nov. 27, 2006, S133114) ___ Cal.4th ___; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.) The judgment is affirmed.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.