P. v. Perry
Filed 4/26/06 P. v. Perry CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RONALD DEAN PERRY, Defendant and Appellant. |
F048717
(Super. Ct. No. MCR015603)
OPINION |
THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Madera County. Thomas L. Bender, Judge.
Eleanor M. Kraft, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Assistant Attorney General, and Charles A. French, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
-ooOoo-
On September 27, 2004, appellant Ronald Dean Perry pled no contest to two felonies, possession for sale of a controlled substance (methamphetamine) (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378; count 1) and possession of ammunition by a felon (Pen. Code, § 12316, subd. (b)(1); count 2), on the condition that he be placed on five years probation with a potential county jail term of up to one year, but subject to a maximum prison term of three years, eight months should he violate probation.
On November 3, 2004, the date for sentencing, Perry requested permission to withdraw his plea and the court appointed counsel to represent him on a motion to withdraw the plea.
On July 14, 2005, after a contested hearing at which Perry, two of his potential trial witnesses, and his trial counsel testified, the court denied his motion to withdraw his plea and placed him on probation for five years, imposed a 180-day jail term with eligibility for work furlough/county parole, imposed a Penal Code section 1202.4 restitution fine of $200, a Penal Code section 672 fine including penalties and surcharges totaling $630, Health and Safety Code fines, fees, penalties and surcharges, and probation supervision fees.
Perry's appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which summarizes the pertinent facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks that this court independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) The opening brief includes appellate counsel's declaration indicating that Perry was advised he could file his own brief with this court. By letter dated December 27, 2005, we invited Perry to submit additional briefing. To date, he has not done so.
After independent review of the record, we have concluded that no reasonably arguable legal or factual appellate issue exists.
The judgment is affirmed.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney referral.
Analysis and review provided by Vista Apartment Manager Attorneys.
* Before Harris, Acting P.J., Gomes, J. and Dawson, J.
