P. v. Lackey

Filed 5/16/06  P. v. Lackey CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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  This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

            APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County.  Lee P. Felice, Judge.

            Deborah Prucha, 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-

            Appellant, Michael Allen Lackey, pled guilty to the continuous sexual abuse of a child under the age of 14 (count 2/Pen. Code, § 288.5, subd. (a)) and two counts of lewd and lascivious conduct with a child under the age of 14 (counts 5 & 7/Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a)).  On July 26, 2005, the court sentenced Lackey to an aggregate 16-year term, the middle term of 12 years on count 2 and a consecutive two-year term (one-third the middle term of six years) on each remaining count.

Lackey's appellate counsel has filed a brief which summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record.  (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.)  Lackey has not responded to this court's invitation to submit additional briefing.  However, our review of the record disclosed that Lackey's abstract of judgment erroneously indicates that the court imposed two restitution fines of $200 each and two parole revocation fines of $200 each even though the court imposed only one restitution fine of $200 and one parole revocation fine of $200.

Further, following independent review of the record we find that with the exception of the issue noted above, no reasonably arguable factual or legal issues exist.

DISPOSITION

            The trial court is directed to prepare an amended abstract of judgment that shows that it imposed only one restitution fine of $200 and one parole revocation fine of $200 and to forward a certified copy to the Department of Corrections.  In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.

Publication courtesy of California free legal advice.

Analysis and review provided by Carlsbad Apartment Manager Lawyers.

^* Before Wiseman, Acting P.J., Levy, J., and Cornell, J.