legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Burchard
Esther K. Hong, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Appellant.
Following denial of her motion to suppress evidence (Pen. Code, § 1538.5)[1] in case No. SCD232737, in April 2012, Ann Marie Burchard entered a negotiated guilty plea to using personal identifying information of another (§ 530.5, subd. (a)) and burglary (§ 459). In June, in case No. SCD241185, Burchard entered a negotiated guilty plea to using personal identifying information of another (§ 530.5, subd. (a)) while released from custody on bail (§ 12022.1, subd. (b)). In July, the court imposed a stipulated four-year sentence: in case No. SCD241185, the two-year middle term on the substantive offense and two years for the enhancement, and in case No. SCD232737, a concurrent two-year middle term for each offense. The court ordered the entire sentence to be served in the custody of the sheriff. Burchard appeals. We affirm.
BACKGROUND
In case No. SCD232737, Burchard willfully and unlawfully used personal identifying information of another to commit theft and entered a building with the intent to commit theft. In case No. SCD241185, while released from custody on bail, Burchard willfully and unlawfully obtained personal identifying information of another person and used that information for an unlawful purpose.
DISCUSSION
I
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief summarizing the facts and proceedings below. Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders) counsel mentions as possible, but not arguable, issues: (1) whether the court committed reversible error by denying the suppression motion; (2) whether Burchard's three attorneys provided effective assistance of counsel; (3) whether Burchard's due process rights were denied when she pleaded guilty and agreed to a prison sentence, but was then sentenced to county jail due to a change in the law; and (4) whether ex post facto principles require that Burchard serve her sentence in prison.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale