P. v. Cervantez
Filed 10/4/07 P. v. Cervantez CA6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JUAN MORALES CERVANTEZ, Defendant and Appellant. | H031096 (Monterey County Super. Ct. No. SS043101) |
On February 1, 2005, defendant Juan Morales Cervantez pleaded guilty to one felony charge of transporting cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, 11352), and one misdemeanor charge of driving with a blood alcohol content over the legal limit. (Veh. Code 23152, subd. (b).) The trial court placed defendant on probation for five years with a number of conditions. On November 28, 2006, defendant admitted he had violated probation by failing to comply with a number of the probation conditions and the trial court terminated probation, sentencing the defendant to four years in state prison. The defendant filed a timely notice of appeal from this judgment on January 4, 2007.
Thereafter, the defendant, assisted by new counsel, moved to recall his sentence pursuant to Penal Code section 1170, subdivision (d). The court granted the motion and imposed a four year prison term and suspended the execution of that sentence. The court reinstated probation on the condition the defendant serve additional time in the county jail, and comply with further probation conditions as well as the conditions originally imposed. Defendant was released from county jail on April 16, 2007.
Pursuant to defendants request, we appointed counsel to represent defendant in this court. Appointed counsel filed an opening brief which states the case and the facts but raises no specific issues. We notified defendant of his right to submit written argument in his own behalf within 30 days. That period has elapsed and we have received no written argument from defendant.
Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we have reviewed the entire record and have concluded that there is no arguable issue on appeal.
Disposition
The judgment is affirmed.
_____________________________________
rushing, P.J.
WE CONCUR:
_________________________________
PREMO, J.
_________________________________
ELIA, J.
Publication Courtesy of California lawyer directory.
Analysis and review provided by Escondido Property line attorney.
