P. v. Luu
Pursuant to a negotiated disposition, Xuong Luu (defendant) pleaded guilty to one count of failing to update his sex offender registration within five working days of his birthday (Pen. Code, § 290.012, subd. (a)).
On February 3, 2012, the court sentenced defendant to a two-year state prison term to be served concurrently with a prison sentence that he was serving in a case in Sacramento County. The People stipulated that defendant would receive presentence custody credits at "half-time." Accordingly, the court awarded defendant 100 actual days of custody credits and 100 days of conduct credits. Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal and sought and was granted a certificate of probable cause.
Defendant's appointed counsel has filed an opening brief in which no issues are raised and asks this court for an independent review of the record as required by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Counsel has declared that defendant was notified that no issues were being raised by counsel on appeal and that an independent review under Wende was being requested.
On September 28, 2012, we notified defendant of his right to submit written argument on his own behalf within 30 days. That time has passed and we have not received a response from defendant.
Pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, we have reviewed the entire record and have concluded there is no arguable issue on appeal. However, we do find that the court erred in considering defendant's ability to pay a court operations assessment (Pen. Code, § 1465.8) and a criminal conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373).
Pursuant to People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we provide "a brief description of the . . . procedural history of the case, the crimes of which the defendant was convicted, and the punishment imposed." (Id. at p. 110.)
Since appellant waived referral to the probation department, the record does not contain a statement of the underlying facts.
Comments on P. v. Luu