P. v. Welch

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed 7/11/13  P. v. Welch CA3

 

 

 

 

 

 

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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

(San Joaquin>)

----

 

 

 
>

THE PEOPLE,                           Plaintiff and Respondent,               v.   DWIGHT WELCH,                           Defendant and Appellant.

C073069   (Super. Ct. No. SF120176A)

 

 

 

            Defendant
Dwight Welch, having been convicted of a felony, is prohibited from possessing
firearms.href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" title="">[1]  On March
8, 2012, in Stockton, California,
he possessed a firearm. 

            Defendant
pleaded no contest to possession of a
firearm by a convicted felon.  (Pen.
Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1).)  Five
related counts were dismissed for insufficient evidence and an additional count
was dismissed in light of the plea. 

            Defendant
was sentenced to state prison for the
stipulated upper term of three years, awarded 54 days of custody credit and 54
days of conduct credit (Pen. Code, § 4019), and ordered to pay a $240
restitution fine (id., § 1202.4,
subd. (b)) plus a $24 administrative surcharge, a $240 restitution fine
suspended unless parole is revoked (id.,
§ 1202.45), a $40 court operations fee (id., § 1465.8, subd. (a)(1)), and a $30 court facilities
assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373). 

            Defendant
appeals.  We appointed href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">counsel to represent defendant on
appeal.  Counsel filed an href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.com/">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 have elapsed, and we have 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.

 

 

                                                                                            BUTZ                              , Acting P. J.

 

 

We concur:

 

 

 

                    MURRAY                      , J.

 

 

 

                    HOCH                            , J.