Fear Not Law Articles: P. v. Sparks

P. v. Sparks

Filed 5/17/07 P. v. Sparks 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

(Butte)

----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

JAMES JOSEPH SPARKS,

Defendant and Appellant.

C053818

(Super. Ct. No. CM025044)

In May 2006, police received a report of a person attempting to purchase drugs at a local park. Responding officers noticed that defendant James Joseph Sparks matched the description of the suspect. Near the front of defendants truck, officers found a cut straw and a folded piece of foil containing residue of suspected drugs. A search of the truck revealed a fanny pack containing a homemade pistol. Defendant admitted possessing the pistol and loading it with shotgun pellets, but he denied knowing that it was unlawful to possess such a weapon.^{^[1]}

Defendant pleaded no contest to carrying a loaded firearm. (Pen. Code, 12031, subd. (a)(1).)^{^[2]} In exchange for his plea, three related counts were dismissed with a Harvey waiver.^{^[3]} Defendant was sentenced to state prison for the midterm of two years, awarded 50 days of custody credit and 24 days of conduct credit, and ordered to pay a $400 restitution fine ( 1202.4, subd. (b)), a $400 restitution fine suspended unless parole is revoked ( 1202.45), and a $20 court security fee ( 1465.8).

Defendant appeals.

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. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from defendant. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

BUTZ , J.

We concur:

HULL, Acting P.J.

ROBIE , J.

Publication courtesy of California pro bono legal advice.

Analysis and review provided by La Mesa Property line Lawyers.

^{^[1]} Our statement of facts is taken from the probation officers report.

^{^[2]} Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

^{^[3]}People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754.

Description	In May 2006, police received a report of a person attempting to purchase drugs at a local park. Responding officers noticed that defendant James Joseph Sparks matched the description of the suspect. Near the front of defendants truck, officers found a cut straw and a folded piece of foil containing residue of suspected drugs. A search of the truck revealed a fanny pack containing a homemade pistol. Defendant admitted possessing the pistol and loading it with shotgun pellets, but he denied knowing that it was unlawful to possess such a weapon. Defendant pleaded no contest to carrying a loaded firearm. (Pen. Code, 12031, subd. (a)(1).) In exchange for his plea, three related counts were dismissed with a Harvey waiver. Defendant was sentenced to state prison for the midterm of two years, awarded 50 days of custody credit and 24 days of conduct credit, and ordered to pay a $400 restitution fine ( 1202.4, subd. (b)), a $400 restitution fine suspended unless parole is revoked ( 1202.45), and a $20 court security fee ( 1465.8). Defendant appeals. The judgment is affirmed.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.