P. v. Urbina — Fear Not Law

<h1>P. v. Urbina</h1> Filed 10/18/06 P. v. Urbina CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="319" valign="top"> THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. VICTOR URBINA, Defendant and Appellant. </td> <td width="319" valign="top"> 2d Crim. No. B189386 (Super. Ct. No. GA061243) (Los Angeles County) </td> </tr> </table> Victor Urbina appeals from the judgment entered after he pleaded no contest to <a href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">second degree robbery</a>. (Pen. Code, § 211.) He also admitted serving one prior prison term. (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b).) He was sentenced to four years in state prison and was ordered to pay a $200 <a href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.us/">restitution fine.</a> We appointed counsel to represent Urbina in this appeal. After counsel’s examination of the record, he filed an <a href="http://www.sandiegohealthdirectory.com/">opening brief</a> in which no issues were raised. On August 9, 2006, we advised Urbina that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any <a href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.us/">contentions or issues</a> he wished us to consider. Urbina filed a letter brief alleging that he received ineffective assistance of counsel, that the restitution fine was improperly imposed and he was not properly represented at the restitution hearing, and that his presentence <a href="http://www.sandiegohealthdirectory.com/">custody credits</a> were incorrectly calculated. We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that Urbina's attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no <a href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">arguable issues</a> exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.) The judgment is affirmed. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED. PERREN, J. We concur: GILBERT, P.J. YEGAN, J. Teri Schwartz, Judge Superior Court County of Los Angeles ______________________________ Matthew Alger, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. Publication courtesy of <a href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">California pro bono legal advice</a>. Analysis and review provided by <a href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.us/">La Mesa Property line Lawyers.</a>