P. v. Cronk

Filed 7/18/06 P. v. Cronk CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Mono)

----

Defendant Russell Robert Cronk pled guilty to receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a))^[1] in exchange for a stipulated two-year prison sentence and the dismissal of additional counts and allegations. He was sentenced to the middle term of two years in state prison, with credit for 80 days. The trial court imposed a restitution fine of $400 (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)) and suspended an additional restitution fine in the same amount pending successful completion of parole (§ 1202.45).

Defendant appeals. His request for a certificate of probable cause was denied. (§ 1237.5.)

We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court 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 that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

RAYE , J.

We concur:

SCOTLAND , P.J.

NICHOLSON , J.

Publication Courtesy of California lawyer directory.

Analysis and review provided by Escondido Real Estate Lawyers.

^[1] All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.