P. v. Crain

Filed 2/27/06 P. v. Crain CA2/6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

Jeffrey Crain appeals from a judgment declaring him to be a mentally disordered offender (MDO) following a court trial. (Pen. Code, § 2962.) We appointed counsel to represent him in this appeal. After reviewing the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues and requesting this court to independently examine the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.^[1] We advised Crain that he had 30 days in which to submit a written brief or letter stating any contentions or arguments he wished us to consider, but have received no response. We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellate counsel has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

COFFEE, J.

We concur:

YEGAN, Acting P.J.

PERREN, J.

Charles S. Crandall, Judge

Superior Court County of San Luis Obispo

______________________________

Gerald J. Miller, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Publication courtesy of Vista Minimum Wage Lawyer (http://www.mcmillanlaw.us/) And Vista Lawyers Directory

( http://www.fearnotlaw.com/ )

^[1] The California Supreme Court has granted review in a case holding that the Wende procedure is inapplicable to MDO proceedings. (People v. Smith, review granted July 13, 2005, S133593.) Pending resolution of the issue, we will continue to independently review the record in MDO cases where Wende briefs are filed.