P. v. Conley
Filed 7/2/08 P. v. Conley CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Placer)
----
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JEREMY LEE CONLEY, Defendant and Appellant. | C057598 (Super. Ct. No. 62063373A) |
Defendant Jeremy Lee Conley and a codefendant broke into a school and stole musical equipment and other items worth about $575. Defendant pled no contest to second degree burglary, a felony, and no contest in another case to the possession of a switch blade knife, a misdemeanor. He also admitted that his commission of both crimes was a violation of his probation in a third case. The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and reinstated probation under terms and conditions, including that defendant serve 180 days in county jail and pay certain fees and fines.
Thereafter, defendant admitted violating his probation by possessing marijuana. He was reinstated on probation under the terms and conditions originally imposed, plus conditions that he not use or possess any narcotic or controlled substance without a valid prescription and that he submit to drug testing as requested by any peace officer, and was ordered to serve an additional 20 days in county jail.
Defendant appeals, and we appointed counsel to represent him on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks us to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant.
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error in favor of defendant.
The judgment is affirmed.
SCOTLAND, P.J.
We concur:
SIMS , J.
CANTIL-SAKAUYE , J.
Publication courtesy of California free legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Carlsbad Property line attorney.
