P. v. Manfredonia

























Filed 10/26/10 P. v.
Manfredonia CA3











NOT
TO BE PUBLISHED





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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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

THIRD APPELLATE
DISTRICT

(Trinity)

----
>

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. FRANK THOMAS MANFREDONIA, Defendant and Appellant.

C064655 (Super. Ct. Nos. 08F0111, 09F0059, 09F134)

In July 2007,
in case No. 09F059 (the first case), defendant Frank Thomas Manfredonia
unlawfully took money or personal property from victim Timothy Cuny.

In
September 2008, in case No. 08F0111 (the second case), a probation
search of defendant's place of business revealed crystalline powder and residue
that were suspected of being methamphetamine.


In
September 2009, in case No. 09F134 (the third case), defendant
possessed a personal use amount of methamphetamine.

In
December 2009, defendant pled guilty to grand theft of personal property
and two counts of possession of methamphetamine. In exchange, several counts were
dismissed.

Defendant was
sentenced to state prison for four
years four months, consisting of the upper term of three years for theft plus
eight months consecutive for each possession.
He was awarded 57 days' custody credit and 56 days' conduct credit in
the first case, one day's custody credit in the second case, and two days'
custody credit and two days' conduct credit in the third case. Defendant was ordered to make restitution to
his victim and to pay a $600 restitution fine and a $600 restitution fine
suspended unless parole is revoked.
Defendant did not obtain a certificate of probable cause.

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.

Defendant filed a
supplemental brief identifying the victim as â€