Opinion
D073524
06-29-2018
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. TRUMAN WYLEY PETTIT, Defendant and Appellant.
Matthew R. Garcia, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. JCF000216) APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Imperial County, Ruth Bermudez Montenegro, Judge. Affirmed. Matthew R. Garcia, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Truman Wyley Pettit entered a plea of no contest to a felony charge of shoplifting after a specified prior conviction (Pen. Code, § 459.5). His counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders) informing us there are no reasonably arguable appellate issues and asking this court to independently review the record on appeal for error. We have done so and, finding no error, we affirm.
All statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified. --------
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On November 1, 2017, Truman Wyley Pettit was charged in a complaint with shoplifting with a prior conviction, in violation of section 459.5. The complaint further alleged Pettit suffered a prior conviction which required registration under section 290, subdivision (c).
Pettit entered a negotiated plea of no contest on January 17, 2018, and was advised of his constitutional rights and the consequences of his plea. Counsel stipulated that a factual basis for the plea was contained in the police report, which was incorporated by reference into the record. On November 1, 2017, Pettit stole $131.52 worth of merchandise from the Walmart store in Brawley, California. The court found a written and oral knowing, intelligent, voluntary understanding and explicit waiver of his constitutional rights and a factual basis for the plea.
On February 13, 2018, the court sentenced Pettit. Imposition of sentence was suspended and Pettit was ordered to serve 180 days in jail, with 77 days credit for time served and good conduct, and placed on three years formal probation with specified terms and conditions. Statutory fines and fees were imposed, and the court made a finding that Pettit lacked the ability to pay and reimburse costs pursuant to the Penal Code.
Pettit timely appealed.
Appointed appellate counsel filed a brief summarizing the facts and proceedings in the trial court. Counsel presented no argument for reversal, but asked this court to review the record for error in accordance with Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738, counsel suggested as a possible issue whether the trial court abused its discretion by overruling Pettit's objection to probation conditions numbers 4 to 6 and 10? After we received counsel's brief, we notified Pettit by letter that he could file a supplemental brief, but he did not respond.
We have reviewed the entire record pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738, and considered the issue suggested by counsel, but discerned no reasonably arguable appellate issues. Pettit has been represented adequately by counsel on this appeal.
DISPOSTION
The judgment is affirmed.
IRION, J. WE CONCUR: HALLER, Acting P. J. DATO, J.