P. v. Fourquet
Filed 6/25/12 P. v. Fourquet CA4/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff
and Respondent,
v.
PABLO ALFONSO FOURQUET,
Defendant
and Appellant.
E055305
(Super.Ct.No. RIF1100970)
OPINION
APPEAL
from the Superior Court
of
County. Richard Todd
Fields, Judge. Affirmed.
James
R. Bostwick, Jr., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
No
appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant
appeals after pleading guilty to a single
theft charge resulting from a scheme to defraud thousands of
homeowners. He was sentenced to time
served and placed on probation for three years.
We affirm the conviction.
and Procedure
Beginning
in 2009, defendant sent official-looking letters to thousands of homeowners in Riverside
County under the letterhead of his
business, Title Compliance Office. The
letters told the homeowners that they needed to obtain a certified copy of the
grant deed to their property, and that they could obtain one if they sent $167
to Title Compliance Office by the stated deadline. In 2010 and 2011, defendant submitted to the
Riverside County Assessor Clerk Recorder’s office a total of 2496 requests for
certified copies of grant deeds.
On
April 22, 2011, the People
charged defendant with grand theft (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (a)) and
conspiring with another person to commit fraud
(§182, subd. (a)(4)).
name="_ftnref1" title="">[1] Defendant filed a written motion to suppress
evidence and return property seized under a search warrant. After written opposition and argument, the
court denied the motion.
On
September 1, 2011, defendant
filed a section 995 motion arguing the evidence produced at the
hold him. The court denied the
motion. Defendant did not renew his
previous motion to suppress evidence.
On
October 11, 2011,
defendant pled guilty to grand theft. As
set forth in the plea agreement, the trial court sentenced defendant to time
served and placed him on three years of formal probation. In addition, defendant relinquished $417,000
in seized accounts to pay victim restitution.
This appeal followed.
Upon defendant’s request,
this court appointed counsel to represent him on appeal. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority
of People
v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders
v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493], setting
forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable
issues and requesting this court to conduct an independent review of the
record.
We
offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal
supplemental brief, but he has not done so.
Pursuant to the mandate of People
v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have independently reviewed the record
for potential error and find no arguable
issues.
The
judgment of conviction is affirmed.
NOT
TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
RAMIREZ
P. J.
We concur:
KING
J.
MILLER
J.
unless otherwise indicated.
