P. v. Castrejon
Filed 3/20/07 P. v. Castrejon CA2/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LEE MICHAEL CASTREJON, Defendant and Appellant. | B193473 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. MA035658) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Carol Koppel, Judge. Affirmed.
Jonathan B. Steiner and Richard L. Fitzer, under appointments by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Lee Michael Castrejon appeals from a judgment entered following his guilty plea to infliction of corporal injury to a spouse, cohabitant, former cohabitant, or childs parent (Pen. Code, 273.5, subd. (a)) and possession of a short barreled shotgun (Pen. Code, 12020, subd. (a)(1)).[1] Imposition of sentence was suspended and he was placed on formal probation for three years under certain terms and conditions, including that he spend 180 days in jail.
After review of the record, appellants court-appointed counsel filed an opening brief requesting this court to independently review the record pursuant to the holding of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.
We attempted on October 25, 2006, and December 6, 2006, to advise appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to consider. Both notices were returned by the post office as undeliverable. Appointed counsel was contacted and he indicated he does not have a current forwarding address for appellant.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that no arguable issues exist and that appellant has, by virtue of counsels compliance with the Wende procedure and our review of the record, received adequate and effective appellate review of the judgment entered against him in this case. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 278; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 112-113.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
WILLHITE, Acting P.J.
We concur:
MANELLA, J.
SUZUKAWA, J.
Publication Courtesy of California lawyer directory.
Analysis and review provided by Escondido Property line attorney.
[1] The probation and arrest reports state that after Ms. L. refused to have sex with appellant, appellant loaded one shell into the chamber of a shotgun with a 16 -inch barrel and ordered Ms. L. into the bedroom, where he raped her. The next day appellant punched Ms. L. in the face. Ms. L. had previously lived with appellant. The rape charge was dismissed at the time of sentencing.
