P. v. Blair
Filed 7/20/10 P. v. Blair CA2/6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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
SECOND APPELLATE
DISTRICT
DIVISION SIX
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and
Respondent,
v.
TRAVIS EUGENE BLAIR,
Defendant and
Appellant.
2d Crim. No.
B221641
(Super. Ct.
Nos. CR45191, CR46644, 2002005046, 2003038976, 2006038254 & 2008045120)
(Ventura
County)
Travis Eugene Blair
appeals from six orders denying his petitions for waiver of restitution and
courts fees in six cases which we consider and disposed of together. (Rebney
v. Wells Fargo Bank (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d 1117, 1128.)
In six cases in Ventura
Superior Court, appellant was convicted of seven offenses: he was convicted twice of possessing of a controlled substance
(Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a), Nos. CR45191 & CR46644),
twice of committing identity theft (Pen. Code, § 530.5, subd. (a),[1] No. 2002005046), twice of committing petty
theft with a prior (§ 666, Nos. 2003038976 & 2006038254), and once of receiving stolen property (§ 496,
subd. (a), No. 2008045120).
>
In each case, the court
imposed mandatory restitution fines pursuant to section 1202.4, subdivision (b)
and mandatory, corresponding parole revocation restitution fines (stayed
pending completion of parole) pursuant to section 1202.45. In all but one case, these restitution fines
were the $200 statutory minimum; in one case the fine was $400. The court imposed victim restitution in only
one case, payable to Frye's Electronics in an amount to be determined pursuant
to section 1202.4, subdivision (f). In
each case the court imposed various statutory fees, and waived others based on
appellant's inability to pay.
Appellant was scheduled
to be released from prison in February 2010.
He hoped to be released on parole to Arizona
where his sister lived. A parolee who is
subject to an outstanding restitution fine may not be released to another state
unless he or she posts a bond. (§
11177.2.)
In December 2009,
appellant petitioned the trial court in each of his six cases to waive the
unpaid restitution fines so that he
could be paroled in Arizona. The trial court denied his petitions.
We appointed counsel to represent appellant on this
appeal. After examining the record,
counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues and requesting that this court
independently examine the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.
On April 5, 2010, we advised appellant that he had 30
days in which to submit a written brief or letter raising any contentions or arguments he wished us to
consider. Appellant did not respond.
We have examined the
entire record. We are satisfied that
appellant's counsel has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no
arguable issues exist. (
441.)
>
DISPOSITION
The orders appealed from
are affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.
COFFEE,
J.
We concur:
GILBERT, P.J.
YEGAN, J.
Ronald
Purnal, Judge
Bruce
A. Clark, Judge
Charles
R. McGrath, Judge
Bruce
A. Young, Judge
Superior
Court County
of Ventura
______________________________
Suzan E. Hier, under
appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for
Plaintiff and Respondent.
Publication courtesy of San
Diego pro bono legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Poway Property line attorney.
San Diego Case Information
provided by www.fearnotlaw.com
[1] All statutory references are to the Penal Code
unless otherwise stated.
