People v. Nigro

Full title: THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JEREMY SCOTT NIGRO, Defendant and…

Court: California Court of Appeals, Third District, Butte

Date published: Dec 28, 2007

No. C056152 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 28, 2007)

Opinion

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JEREMY SCOTT NIGRO, Defendant and Appellant. No. C056152 California Court of Appeal, Third District, Butte December 28, 2007

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Super. Ct. No. CM026958

BUTZ, J.

Butte County Interagency Narcotics Task Force agents and local police stopped a vehicle in which defendant Jeremy Scott Nigro was a passenger and arrested defendant pursuant to a parole violation warrant. A search of the trunk revealed a nine-and-one-half-inch dagger in a bag belonging to defendant, and a .22-caliber, semiautomatic rifle and ammunition in a bag under the trunk floor cover.

Defendant was charged with possession of a firearm by a felon (Pen. Code, § 12021, subd. (a)(1))¹ and possession of ammunition by a felon (§ 12316, subd. (b)(1)). The complaint also alleged that defendant suffered a prior conviction (§ 667.5, subd. (b)).

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

Defendant entered a negotiated plea of no contest to possession of a firearm in exchange for dismissal of all other charges against him. The court denied probation and sentenced defendant to the upper term of three years in state prison based on his numerous prior convictions, the fact that he served a prior prison term, the fact that he was on parole at the time of the offense, and the fact that his prior performance on probation and parole was unsatisfactory. The court imposed a restitution fine of $600 (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)), a parole revocation fine of $600 (§ 1202.45) stayed pending successful completion of parole, and a $20 court security fee (§ 1465.8), and recommended that defendant attend drug and alcohol counseling while in custody. No presentence custody credits were awarded. Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal.

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. (People v. Wende (1979) 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 elapsed, and we have received no communication from defendant.

Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error in favor of defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: SCOTLAND , P.J., MORRISON , J.