Filed 7/15/26 P. v. Hansen CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
THE PEOPLE,
F090618
Plaintiff and Respondent,
(Super. Ct. No. CR-24-014963)
v.
RAYMOND HANSEN, JR., OPINION
Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County. Kellee C.
Westbrook, Judge.
Vicki Hightower, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and
Respondent.
-ooOoo-
* Before Detjen, Acting P. J., Snauffer, J. and Guerra, J.
Defendant Raymond Hansen, Jr., appeals following revocation of probation and
imposition of a previously suspended sentence. Hansen’s appointed counsel has filed a
brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, identifying no error and asking
our court to determine whether there are arguable issues on appeal. Hansen was afforded
an opportunity to submit a supplemental brief but failed to do so in the time allotted. We
have conducted an independent review of the record and find there are no arguable
issues. Accordingly, we affirm.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On December 6, 2024, the Stanislaus County District Attorney filed a complaint
charging Hansen with possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377,
subd. (a)). The complaint also alleged, inter alia, that Hansen had been convicted of an
offense that required him to register pursuant to Penal Code section 290, subdivision (c)1
(Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)).
On January 30, 2025,2 Hansen pled no contest and admitted he had been convicted
of an offense that required him to register pursuant to section 290, subdivision (c).
Pursuant to the plea agreement, he was sentenced to a term of 16 months (the lower
term), execution of which was suspended pending successful completion of a residential
drug treatment program. He was also placed on probation for a term of two years, with
the first 121 days to be served in county jail.
On September 24, Hansen admitted to a probation violation. The trial court
revoked probation and imposed the previously suspended 16-month sentence.
On October 21, Hansen timely filed a notice of appeal. The trial court denied his
request for a certificate of probable cause. On November 6, he filed a second notice of
appeal. The court once again denied his request for a certificate of probable cause.
1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
2 Subsequent references to dates are to dates in 2025 unless stated otherwise.
2.
FACTUAL SUMMARY
At the change of plea hearing on January 30, Hansen, through counsel, stipulated
that, on December 5, 2024, he willfully possessed a usable amount of methamphetamine.
He also admitted that he was previously convicted of an offense that required him to
register pursuant to section 290, subdivision (c).
DISCUSSION
As noted above, Hansen’s counsel filed a Wende brief identifying no basis for
relief and asking that we review the record to determine whether there were any arguable
issues on appeal. Having carefully reviewed the entire record, we conclude that there are
no arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at pp. 441–443.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
3.