legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Baxter

P. v. Baxter
09:08:2006


P. v. Baxter




Filed 9/7/06 P. v. Baxter CA2/5







NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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



SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT



DIVISION FIVE










THE PEOPLE,


Plaintiff and Respondent,


v.


THOMAS WILSON BAXTER,


Defendant and Appellant.



B186792


(Los Angeles County


Super. Ct. No. BA273044)



APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County.


C. H. Rehm, Judge. Affirmed.


John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.


No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


_______________


In February 2004, appellant Thomas Wilson Baxter pled guilty to two counts of violation of Health and Safety Code section 11350, subdivision (a), possession of a controlled substance. He was placed on probation for a period of three years. On September 26, 2005, the superior court found appellant in violation of his probation. The court then reinstated probation on additional terms and conditions. We appointed counsel to represent him on appeal.


After examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised. On or before June 2, 2006, counsel sent appellant a copy of the record on appeal and a copy of the opening brief, and advised appellant that he could submit a supplemental brief in his own behalf, within 30 days. On June 8, 2006 we advised appellant that he had 30 days in which to submit by brief or letter any argument or contention he wished this court to consider. No response has been received to date.


We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellant's attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)


The judgment is affirmed.


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS


ARMSTRONG, Acting P. J.


We concur:


MOSK, J.


KRIEGLER, J.


Publication courtesy of California free legal advice.


Analysis and review provided by Carlsbad Property line attorney.





Description In February 2004, appellant pled guilty to two counts of violation of Health and Safety Code section 11350, subdivision (a), possession of a controlled substance. Appellant was placed on probation for a period of three years. On September 26, 2005, the superior court found appellant in violation of his probation. The court then reinstated probation on additional terms and conditions. Court appointed counsel to represent him on appeal. Court examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellant's attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441. The judgement is affirmed.
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale