P. v. Hampton
Filed 2/8/07 P. v. Hampton CA6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
THE PEOPLE, H030418
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Santa Clara County
Superior Court
v. No. CC592965)
RACHEL HAMPTON,
Defendant and Appellant.
_____________________________________/
Defendant Rachel Hampton was charged with being an accessory by harboring, concealing, and aiding her son Carlos Harris, who was a principal in two felonies. (Pen. Code, § 32.) After the district attorney moved to reduce the charge to a misdemeanor (Pen. Code, § 17, subd. (b)), defendant pleaded guilty to the charged offense. The trial court ordered her to perform 50 hours of community service, to pay $130 in fines and security fees, and gave her credit for one day served in county jail. Defendant was not placed on probation. Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal.
During the investigation of an attempted homicide in October 2004, Officer Brian Anderson spoke to defendant about her son Harris. Anderson told her that Harris was wanted for attempted murder, robbery, and assault. Defendant denied knowing where Harris was. When Harris was arrested in November 2004, police found a letter to Harris from defendant. Defendant advised Harris to leave the area, and gave him the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of various people in California and elsewhere. Defendant admitted that she had sent the letter. Harris was eventually convicted of attempted murder, robbery, and assault with a deadly weapon.
Appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief that states the case and the facts, but raises no issues. Defendant was notified of her right to submit written argument on her own behalf, but has failed to avail herself of the opportunity. Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we have reviewed the entire record and have concluded that there are no arguable issues on appeal.
The judgment is affirmed.
_______________________________
Mihara, J.
WE CONCUR:
_____________________________
Bamattre-Manoukian, Acting P.J.
_____________________________
Duffy, J.
Publication courtesy of California free legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Carlsbad Property line attorney.
