From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Peck

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Tehama)
Jul 28, 2017
C083220 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 28, 2017)

Opinion

C083220

07-28-2017

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ROY AUBURN PECK III, Defendant and Appellant.


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. NCR97174)

Appointed counsel for defendant Roy Auburn Peck III asks this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we will affirm the judgment.

We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)

I. BACKGROUND

In 2001, defendant was convicted of lewd and lascivious conduct with a child under 14. In February 2015, investigators contacted defendant and asked him to identify himself; he gave them a false name. Another investigator recognized defendant, called him by his correct name, and defendant answered. Dispatch informed the investigators defendant had outstanding warrants and had not registered as a sex offender as required. The officers arrested defendant.

An information charged defendant with failure to register upon release from incarceration (Pen. Code, § 290.015, subd. (a)) and giving false information to a peace officer, a misdemeanor (§ 148.9, subd. (a)). The information alleged that appellant had a prior felony "strike" conviction (§§ 667, subd. (d), 1170.12, subd. (b)), and had served a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)).

Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. --------

Defendant pleaded guilty to failing to register upon release from incarceration within five working days of release and admitted the enhancement allegation that he had a prior serious felony conviction. The trial court dismissed the remaining counts and allegations. The trial court sentenced defendant in accordance with the plea, to a term of 16 months, doubled pursuant to the strike. The trial court awarded defendant 433 days of presentence custody credit, and ordered defendant to pay a $600 restitution fine (§ 1202.4), an identical parole revocation, suspended unless parole is revoked (§ 1202.45), a $40 court operations assessment (§1465.8), and a $30 conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373). The trial court granted defendant's request for a certificate of probable cause.

II. DISCUSSION

Counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and requests that we review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised of his 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 examined the record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

III. DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

/S/_________

RENNER, J. We concur: /S/_________
RAYE, P. J. /S/_________
MAURO, J.


Summaries of

People v. Peck

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Tehama)
Jul 28, 2017
C083220 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 28, 2017)
Case details for

People v. Peck

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ROY AUBURN PECK III, Defendant…

Court:COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Tehama)

Date published: Jul 28, 2017

Citations

C083220 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 28, 2017)