P. v. Lewis
Filed 4/11/06 P. v. Lewis CA4/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DEJUAN DARSHAWN LEWIS, Defendant and Appellant. | E038859 (Super.Ct.No. SWF003384) OPINION |
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Robert J. McIntyre, Judge. Affirmed.
Michelle C. Rogers, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
On August 15, 2003, the defendant, represented by counsel, pled guilty to a violation of Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a)(1), assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury, and Penal Code sections 182, subdivision (a)(1)/245, subdivision (a)(1), conspiracy to commit assault, as charged in counts 4 and 8 of the third amended felony complaint filed by the District Attorney of Riverside County. The remaining counts and allegations were dismissed and stricken pursuant to Penal Code section 1385 and the defendant was placed on a formal grant of probation for three years on the condition he spend one year in the local jail.
Thereafter, on May 31, 2005, the defendant, once again represented by counsel, admitted to a violation of his grant of probation and he was committed to state prison for three years, less custody credits and, in conjunction with the negotiated disposition, the sentence was ordered to run concurrent with any sentence imposed in case No. RIC122936.
We offered the defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.
Defendant appealed, and upon his request this court appointed counsel to represent him. 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 undertake a review of the entire record.
We offered the defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.
We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
/s/ RAMIREZ
P.J.
We concur:
/s/ McKINSTER
J.
/s/ KING
J.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney referral.
Analysis and review provided by Vista Apartment Manager Lawyers.
