P. v.Archangel
Filed 7/2/08 P. v.Archangel 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
(San Joaquin)
----
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. KEVIN LAMAR ARCHANGEL, Defendant and Appellant. | C057233 (Super. Ct. No. SF101227A) |
The trial court suspended execution of a 16-month prison sentence and placed defendant Kevin Lamar Archangel on five years of formal probation after he pled no contest to possession of a controlled substance. Defendant was ordered to pay specified fees and fines.
Within the next 10 months, the People filed two affidavits alleging defendant violated probation based on charges pending against him for battery on L. J. on May 31, 2007, for threatening L. J. with a deadly weapon and two counts of violating a protective order on July 19, 2007.
Following a contested hearing, the court found defendant violated probation by violating the protective order, inflicting injury on L. J., and making threats against her. The court revoked probation, executed the previously-imposed 16-month prison sentence (minus 118 days of custody credit) and ordered that defendant pay specified fees and fines.
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 elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant.
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error in favor of defendant.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
ROBIE , J.
We concur:
SIMS , Acting P.J.
NICHOLSON , J.
Publication courtesy of San Diego pro bono legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Poway Property line attorney.
