P. v. Lamos

Filed 10/25/06 P. v. Lamos 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

LENARD LEROY LAMOS,

Defendant and Appellant.

H030088

(Santa Clara County

Super.Ct.No. CC472276)

Defendant Lenard Leroy Lamos entered pleas of nolo contendere to charges of failing to inform a law enforcement agency of his new address (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (a)(1)(A)) and being under the influence of a controlled substance, methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11550, subd. (a)). He also admitted one prior strike conviction pursuant to Penal Code sections 667, subdivisions (b) through (i) and 1170.12 and one prior prison term within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5 subdivision (b). The pleas and admissions were entered on the condition that he receive a sentence of no more than 32 months in the state prison.

The trial court granted defendant’s Romero motion (People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497) and struck the prior strike conviction. The court also struck the prior prison term enhancement pursuant to Penal Code section 1385. Defendant was sentenced to a total term of two years in state prison and given credits of 648 days.

Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal.

Appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which states the case and the facts but raises no issues. We notified defendant of his right to submit written argument on his own behalf within 30 days. That period has elapsed and we have received no written response from defendant.

Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we have reviewed the entire record and have concluded that there is no arguable issue on appeal.

The judgment is affirmed.

Duffy, J.

WE CONCUR:

Mihara, Acting, P.J.

McAdams, J.

Publication courtesy of California pro bono lawyer directory.

Analysis and review provided by Chula Vista Property line attorney.

Description	Defendant entered pleas of nolo contendere to charges of failing to inform a law enforcement agency of his new address and being under the influence of a controlled substance, methamphetamine. Defendant also admitted one prior strike conviction and one prior prison term. The pleas and admissions were entered on the condition that he receive a sentence of no more than 32 months in the state prison. The trial court granted defendant’s Romero motion and struck the prior strike conviction. The court also struck the prior prison term enhancement. Defendant was sentenced to a total term of two years in state prison and given credits of 648 days. Court reviewed the entire record and concluded that there were no arguable issue on appeal. The judgment is affirmed.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.