P. v. Richardson
Filed 6/12/06 P. v. Richardson CA6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
THE PEOPLE, H029500
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Santa Cruz County
Superior Court
v. Nos. F04968, F08714)
WAYNE KEITH RICHARDSON,
Defendant and Appellant.
_____________________________________/
Defendant pleaded no contest to one count of violating Corporations Code section 25401 (sale of securities by false or misleading communications). The plea was entered pursuant to a plea agreement that required the prosecutor to dismiss the remaining counts and stipulated that defendant would receive a one-year state prison term (one-third of the midterm) consecutive to a sentence imposed in Santa Clara County and be ordered to pay $50,000 in restitution. The prosecutor dismissed the remaining counts, and the trial court imposed the one-year prison term and ordered defendant to pay the agreed amount of restitution. Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal.
Appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which states the case and the facts but raises no issues. Defendant was notified of his right to submit written argument on his own behalf but has failed to avail himself of the opportunity. Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we have reviewed the entire record and have concluded that there are no arguable issues on appeal.
The judgment is affirmed.
_______________________________
Mihara, Acting P.J.
WE CONCUR:
_____________________________
McAdams, J.
_____________________________
Duffy, J.
Publication courtesy of San Diego free legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Santee Apartment Manager Attorneys.