P. v. Kirker

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed 6/24/13  P. v. Kirker CA2/3

 

 

 

 

 

 

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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

 

SECOND APPELLATE
DISTRICT

 

DIVISION SIX

 

 
>

THE PEOPLE,       Plaintiff and Respondent,   v.   THOMAS ALLEN KIRKER,       Defendant and Appellant.

2d Crim. No. B246928 (Super. Ct. No. F479307 (San Luis Obispo County)

 

                        Thomas Allen Kirker
appeals from the judgment entered after he pled no contest to href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.com/">assault (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4))href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" title="">[1]
and admitted a prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subds. (d)-(e); 1170.12, subds.
(b)-(c)).  Five weeks after the plea,
appellant indicated that he wanted to withdraw his plea, but after new counsel
was appointed, withdrew the plea withdrawal motion.  The trial court suspended imposition of
sentence and granted probation with 90 days jail.  Appellant was ordered to pay a $240
restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b); a $240 probation revocation fine (§
1202.44), and a $1,000 fine.

                        Appellant filed a href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">notice of appeal and a request for
certificate of probable cause (§ 1237.5, subd. (a)) alleging that he did not
commit the assault.  

                        We appointed href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">counsel to represent appellant in this
appeal.  After counsel's examination of
the record, counsel filed a brief raising no issues.  On May
9, 2013, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to
personally submit any contentions or issues that he wished to raise on
appeal.  No response has been
received. 

                        We have reviewed the
entire record and are satisfied that appellant's attorney has fully complied
with his responsibilities and that no arguable
issues exist.  (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 443; People v. Kelly (2006)
40 Cal.4th 106, 125-126.)

                        The judgment is
affirmed.

                        NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

 

 

 

 

                                                                        YEGAN,
J.

 

 

We concur:

 

 

 

                        GILBERT, P.J.

 

 

 

                        PERREN, J.



Michael
Duffy, Judge

 

Superior
Court County
of San Luis Obispo

 

______________________________

 

 

                        California Appellate
Project, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, Jonathan B. Steiner,
Executive Director and Richard R. Lennon, Staff Attorney, for Appellant./ 

 

                        No appearance for
Respondent.