P. v. Watson

Filed 8/27/07 P. v. Watson

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Shasta)

----

Defendant Russell Wade Watson entered a negotiated plea of guilty to unlawful taking or driving of a vehicle (Veh. Code,  10851, subd. (a)) and admitted allegations of a prior strike and prison term. The trial court imposed the stipulated term of five years state prison, ordered a $400 restitution fine, stayed a $400 restitution fine pending successful completion of parole, a $20 court security fee, and awarded 63 days credit (43 actual and 20 conduct).

Defendant waived the preliminary hearing and asked for immediate sentencing after the entry of his plea. The facts of the offense are therefore taken from the complaint. Defendant took Michael Huberts Dodge Dakota truck without his consent.

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. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

CANTIL-SAKAUYE , J.

We concur:

SCOTLAND, P.J.

NICHOLSON , J.

Publication Courtesy of California attorney directory.

Analysis and review provided by Oceanside Property line attorney.