P. v. Liodas
Thomas Steven Liodas filed a notice of appeal with this court following the judgment of conviction ordering him to formal probation after he entered a guilty plea to possession of methamphetamine and possession of narcotics paraphernalia.[1] (See Health & Saf. 11377, subd. (a), 11364.) A certificate of probable cause was denied when requested for ineffective assistance of counsel. Thus, the appeal is limited to issues arising after entry of the plea that do not challenge its validity or involve a search or seizure. (See Pen. Code, 1237.5; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 30(b).)
Court appointed counsel to represent Liodas on appeal. Counsel filed a brief which set forth the facts of the case. Counsel did not argue against Liodas but advised the court he failed to find any issues to argue on Liodass behalf. Court examine the entire record ourselves to see if any arguable issue is present. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) The judgment is affirmed.
Comments on P. v. Liodas