Fear Not Law Articles: P. v. Tucey

P. v. Tucey

Filed 9/25/07 P. v. Tucey 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

(Shasta)

----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

PAUL MICHAEL TUCEY,

Defendant and Appellant.

C055660

(Super. Ct. Nos. 03F9204, 06F6423)

During an argument with Christopher Best, the ex-husband of defendant Paul Michael Tuceys current paramour, defendant threatened to cut or stab Best with a bowie-type knife. Defendant was charged with assault with great bodily injury and with a deadly weapon, and exhibiting a deadly weapon. On March 9, 2007, the information was amended to include a third count of making criminal threats. Defendant pled no contest to one count of making criminal threats in case No. 06F6423 and admitted a violation of probation in case No. 03F9204. As part of the plea, the remaining charges were dismissed and it was agreed defendant would be sentenced to concurrent prison terms of two years in each case. Defendant was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement. Defendant sought a certificate of probable cause which was denied. Defendant appeals.

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.

ROBIE , J.

We concur:

BLEASE , Acting P.J.

MORRISON , J.

Publication courtesy of California pro bono lawyer directory.

Analysis and review provided by Chula Vista Property line Lawyers.

Description	During an argument with Christopher Best, the ex-husband of defendant Paul Michael Tuceys current paramour, defendant threatened to cut or stab Best with a bowie-type knife. Defendant was charged with assault with great bodily injury and with a deadly weapon, and exhibiting a deadly weapon. On March 9, 2007, the information was amended to include a third count of making criminal threats. Defendant pled no contest to one count of making criminal threats in case No. 06F6423 and admitted a violation of probation in case No. 03F9204. As part of the plea, the remaining charges were dismissed and it was agreed defendant would be sentenced to concurrent prison terms of two years in each case. Defendant was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement. Defendant sought a certificate of probable cause which was denied. Defendant appeals.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.