Opinion
A154423
12-07-2018
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RICHARD CLANCY BURNS, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Sonoma County Super. Ct. No. SCR707599)
This is an appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). We briefly recount the facts and procedural history in accordance with People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.
On August 9, 2017, the Cloverdale Police Department conducted a probation search of the residence of defendant Richard Clancy Burns. Police located a .22 caliber rifle and shot gun shells. Eventually, police found defendant hiding in a closet.
On February 5, 2018, in case No. SCR707599 (hereafter SCR 599), defendant entered a plea of no contest to unlawful possession of firearm by a felon in exchange for no county jail at the outset and release from custody pending sentencing with a Cruz waiver. (Pen. Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1).) As a condition of his release, defendant was required to obey all laws.
People v. Cruz (1988) 44 Cal.3d 1247 (Cruz).
While out on bail and pending sentencing in case No. SCR 599, defendant was charged with committing two additional offenses: misdemeanor possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) in case No. SCR714180 (hereafter SCR 180); and misdemeanor resisting arrest (Pen. Code, § 148, subd. (a)) in case No. SCR713612 (hereafter SCR 612).
On March 21, 2018, the trial court determined that defendant had violated the terms of his Cruz waiver. At that time, defendant was arraigned in case No. SCR 180. The court remanded defendant into custody and continued the matter for sentencing.
On April 18, 2018, defendant entered no contest pleas in case Nos. SCR 180 and SCR 612. The trial court denied probation in both cases and credited defendant for time served. In case SCR 599, the court placed defendant on supervised formal probation for three years, conditioned upon a county jail term of 270 days with credits totaling 64 days.
Defendant filed a notice of appeal in propria persona and requested a certificate of probable cause to challenge the denial of his motion to suppress evidence (Pen. Code, § 1538.5) and the validity of his plea. The certificate of probable cause was denied.
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days have lapsed, and we have received no communication from defendant. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
/s/_________
REARDON, J. We concur: /s/_________
TUCHER, Acting P.J. /s/_________
LEE, J.
Retired Associate Justice of the Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
Judge of the Superior Court of San Mateo County, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution. --------