P. v. Antonio





















Filed 6/22/12
P. v. Antonio CA5













NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT


>

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RAYMOND ANTONIO, Defendant and Appellant.

F063156 (Super. Ct. No. MCR040646) O P I N I O N

THE COURT^*

APPEAL from
a judgment of the Superior Court of Madera
County. Ernest J. LiCalsi, Judge.

Deborah
Prucha, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Office of
the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and
Respondent.

-ooOoo-

Appellant,
Raymond Antonio, pled no contest to being a felon in possession of a firearm (former Pen.
Code, § 12021, subd. (a)(1)) and was sentenced to a stipulated 16‑month
term. Following independent review of the record
pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25
Cal.3d 436, we affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On April
15, 2011, at approximately 2:30 p.m., Antonio was riding his bicycle when he
was stopped by a Madera police officer for failing to signal when he made a
turn. After seeing that Antonio had
prison and gang-related tattoos, the officer searched Antonio and his backpack
for officer safety reasons. The officer
found a .32-caliber revolver in the backpack and arrested Antonio. During a post-arrest interview, Antonio told
the officer that the gun belonged to his cousin, that it was missing a spring
and was inoperable, and that he had intended to sell the gun to buy drugs.

On May 3,
2011, defense counsel filed a suppression motion, which he scheduled to be
heard at Antonio’s preliminary hearing.

On May 13,
2011, at Antonio’s preliminary hearing, the court denied Antonio’s suppression
motion.

On May 19,
2011, the district attorney filed an information charging Antonio with being a
felon in possession of a firearm
(count 1) and being in possession of a firearm after being convicted of certain
offenses (count 2/former Pen. Code, § 12021, subd. (c)(1)).

On July 8,
2011, Antonio entered his no contest plea to count 1 in exchange for the
dismissal of count 2 and a stipulated term of 16 months.

On August 5, 2011, the court
sentenced Antonio to the stipulated 16-month term as per his plea agreement.

Antonio’s appellate counsel has
filed a brief which summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises
no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People
v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d
436.) This court attempted to invite
Antonio to submit additional briefing.
However, a letter that was sent to Antonio’s last known address was
returned with a note indicating that Antonio was no longer at that address and
Antonio has not contacted this court to report his current address.

Following
an independent review of the record we find that no reasonably arguable factual
or legal issues exist.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.