P. v. Auston
Filed 10/13/10 P. v. Auston CA2/7
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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115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
SEVEN
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
RICHARD DAVID AUSTON,
Defendant and Appellant.
B221680
(Los Angeles
County
Super. Ct.
No. TA106713)
APPEAL from
a judgment of the Superior Court
of Los Angeles
County,
Eleanor J. Hunter, Judge.
Affirmed.
Alex
Coolman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No
appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
_______________________
Richard
David Auston and codefendant David Taylor carjacked Ray Huerta, a truck driver,
as he was making a delivery to a pharmacy on the morning of May 21, 2009. As Huerta was unloading his truck, Auston and
Taylor approached. Auston demanded the
keys to the truck at gunpoint, and Huerta surrendered the keys to Taylor. At some point, Huerta grabbed the gun from
Auston and fled. The gun discharged
while Huerta was carrying it, and he dropped the gun on the ground. Huerta then ran into the pharmacy, and police
were called. Police recovered a
.22-caliber semiautomatic handgun and an expended shell casing outside the
pharmacy.
A jury
convicted Auston[1]
of carjacking (Pen. Code, § 215, subd.
(a) (count 1))[2]
with findings that he personally used a
firearm within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivision (b), and that a
principal was armed with a firearm within the meaning of section 12022,
subdivision (a)(1). The jury also
convicted Auston of carrying a loaded and unregistered firearm (§ 12031, subd.
(a)(1) (count 2)). The trial court
sentenced Auston to the middle term of five years in state prison on count 1,
plus 10 years on the firearm-use enhancement.
The court stayed sentencing on count 2 pursuant to section 654. The court ordered Auston to pay a $30 security
assessment, a $30 court construction fee and a $200 restitution fine. A parole revocation fine was imposed and
suspended pursuant to section 1202.45.
Auston received presentence custody credit of 266 days (232 actual days
and 34 days of conduct credit).[3]
Auston
timely filed a notice of appeal. We appointed counsel to represent Auston on
appeal. After examination of the record
counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised. On June
29, 2010, we advised Auston he had 30 days within which to
personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.
We have
examined the entire record and are satisfied Auston's attorney has fully
complied with the responsibilities of counsel and no arguable issues exist. (Smith
v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284 [120 S.Ct. 746, 145 L.Ed.2d 756];
441.)
The
judgment is affirmed.
ZELON,
J.
We concur:
PERLUSS, P.
J.
JACKSON, J.
Publication courtesy of San
Diego free legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Santee Property line attorney.
San Diego Case
Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com
not a party to this appeal.
[2] Statutory references are to the Penal Code.
