legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Valenciz

P. v. Valenciz
06:20:2006

P. v. Valenciz




Filed 6/14/06 P. v. Valenciz CA4/3




NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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



FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT



DIVISION THREE










THE PEOPLE,


Plaintiff and Respondent,


v.


FRANCISCO VALENCIA,


Defendant and Appellant.



G036052


(Super. Ct. No. 98CF3366)


O P I N I O N



Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Daniel J. Didier, Judge. Affirmed.


Kevin D. Sheehy, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.


No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


* * *


We appointed counsel to represent appellant on appeal. Counsel filed a brief which set forth the facts of the case. Counsel did not argue against the client, but advised the court no issues were found to argue on appellant's behalf. We have examined the record and found no arguable issue. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Appellant was given 30 days to file written argument in his own behalf. That period has passed, and we have received no communication from appellant.


The judgment is affirmed.


ARONSON, J.


WE CONCUR:


SILLS, P. J.


FYBEL, J.


Publication Courtesy of San Diego County Legal Resource Directory.


Analysis and review provided by El Cajon Apartment Manager Lawyers.





Description A decision according to People v. Wende.
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale