From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Kemp

Court of Appeals of California, Second Appellate District, Division Six.
Jul 14, 2003
B162680 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 14, 2003)

Opinion

B162680.

7-14-2003

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOHNNIE KEMP, JR. etc., Defendant and Appellant.

Barbara Michel, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Respondent.


Johnnie Kemp, Jr., aka Gerald Pernell, appeals from an order revoking probation and sentencing him to six years state prison. On June 8, 1999, appellant entered into a negotiated plea and pled no contest to forcible rape. (Pen. Code, § 261, subd. (a)(2).) The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and granted appellant five years probation with 556 days county jail.

On August 4, 1999, the trial court found appellant in violation of probation and issued a warrant for his arrest. Appellant appeared on May 6, 2002, and the warrant was recalled. On July 17, 2002, the trial court adjourned the criminal proceedings and ordered a diagnostic assessment pursuant to section 1203.03.

On October 24, 2002, appellant admitted violating probation and was sentenced to a six year midterm. The trial court awarded 759 days presentence custody credit, ordered appellant to register as a sex offender ( § 290), and imposed a $ 200 restitution fine ( § 1202.4, subd. (b)) and a $ 200 parole revocation fine (§ 1202.45).

We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. After counsels examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues.

On June 20, 2003, we advised appellant that he had 30 days in which to personally submit any contentions that he wished to raise on appeal. Appellant filed a supplemental brief on June 30, 3002 contending, among other things, that the first attorney who represented him at the preliminary hearing did not provide adequate representation and was disciplined by the California State Bar in an unrelated matter.

We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that appellants attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441, 158 Cal. Rptr. 839, 600 P.2d 1071.)

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: GILBERT, P.J., and PERREN, J. --------------- Notes: All statutory references are to the Penal Code.


Summaries of

People v. Kemp

Court of Appeals of California, Second Appellate District, Division Six.
Jul 14, 2003
B162680 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 14, 2003)
Case details for

People v. Kemp

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOHNNIE KEMP, JR. etc., Defendant…

Court:Court of Appeals of California, Second Appellate District, Division Six.

Date published: Jul 14, 2003

Citations

B162680 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 14, 2003)