legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. McGill CA5
Appointed counsel for defendant Mario Anthony McGill asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We sent a letter to defendant, advising him of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. Defendant did not respond. On review, we consider whether the trial court properly denied defendant’s petitions/applications for resentencing under Penal Code section 1170.18. We conclude it did and we find no other arguable issues on appeal.
We provide the following brief description of the factual and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)
On March 1, 2013, in case No. BF146594A, the Kern County District Attorney charged defendant with willfully driving or taking a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)) and receiving a stolen vehicle (§ 496d, subd. (a)). Various other allegations were inc

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

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

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale