P. v. Wills




Filed 1/18/11 P. v. Wills CA2/7







NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS


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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SEVEN

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JASON ROBERT WILLS, Defendant and Appellant.

B221666 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. LA062536)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County,
Elizabeth A. Lippitt, Judge. Affirmed.
Tanya Dellaca., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_____________________________





In July 2009 Jason Wills walked into a retail store accompanied by a man in a wheelchair. Wills was carrying an empty camera box, which he showed to store manager Jason Des Saint, and asked if the store had a camera like it. Des Saint handed Wills a new camera and directed Wills to the cash registers. Wills and the man in the wheelchair walked to a sheltered area of the store, where Wills put the new camera inside a backpack that was hanging from the wheelchair. Wills and the man in the wheelchair left the store without paying for the camera. Wills became belligerent after he was followed out of the store and detained by the store’s loss prevention officer.
Wills was charged by information with one count of commercial burglary (Pen. Code, § 459)^[1] and one count of petty theft with a prior theft-related conviction (robbery) (§ 666). It was specially alleged as to both counts that Thomas had previously suffered a serious or violent felony conviction within the meaning of the “Three Strikes” law (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)).
Wills waived his right to a jury trial on the prior conviction allegations and admitted each of them. The trial court found true the allegation that Wills had suffered a prior violent or serious felony conviction for purposes of the Three Strikes law and a prior theft-related conviction within the meaning of section 666. The jury found Wills not guilty of burglary, but convicted him of petty theft.
The trial court sentenced Wills to an aggregate state prison term of 32 months (double the lower term of 16 months under the Three Strikes law). Wills received presentence custody credits of 20 days (14 actual days and 6 days of conduct credits). The court ordered Wills to pay a $30 security assessment, a $30 criminal conviction assessment and a $500 restitution fine. The court imposed and suspended a parole revocation fine pursuant to section 1202.45.
Wills filed a timely notice of appeal. We appointed counsel to represent Wills on appeal. After examination of the record counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised. On September 3, 2010, we advised Wills he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied Wills’s attorney has fully complied with the responsibilities of counsel and no arguable issues exist. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284 [120 S.Ct. 746, 145 L.Ed.2d 756]; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
The judgment is affirmed.

ZELON, J.

We concur:


WOODS, Acting P. J.


JACKSON, J.

Publication Courtesy of California attorney directory.
Analysis and review provided by Oceanside Property line Lawyers.
San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com

---