From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Geronimo

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
Oct 23, 2014
H041027 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 23, 2014)

Opinion

H041027

10-23-2014

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MIGUEL ANGEL GERONIMO, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

(Monterey County Super. Ct. No. SS140556)

Defendant Miguel Angel Geronimo's 17-year-old cousin drove defendant, aged 20, through a mall parking lot so that they could look for a vehicle to burglarize. Having found one, defendant "punched out" the "locking mechanism" of the vehicle and stole the vehicle's stereo and GPS unit. The cousin then drove defendant away from the scene. They were stopped by the police nearby and arrested. Defendant was on parole at the time, had a warrant out for his arrest, and had a history of committing burglaries both as a juvenile and as an adult. His prior performance on both probation and parole had been poor. Defendant blamed his drug use for his crimes.

Defendant was charged by complaint with felony second degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459) and misdemeanor contributing to the delinquency of a minor (Pen. Code, § 272, subd. (a)(1)). It was further alleged that he had suffered a prior strike conviction (Pen. Code, § 1170.12). He entered unconditional no contest pleas to both counts and admitted the strike allegation. Defendant asked the court to strike the strike finding, but the court declined to do so. The court imposed the doubled lower term of 32 months in state prison. Defendant timely filed a notice of appeal.

Appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which states the case and the facts but raises no issues. Defendant was notified of his right to submit written argument on his own behalf but has failed to avail himself of the opportunity. Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we have reviewed the entire record and have concluded that there are no arguable issues on appeal.

The judgment is affirmed.

/s/_________

Mihara, J.
WE CONCUR: /s/_________
Elia, Acting P. J.
/s/_________
Bamattre-Manoukian, J.


Summaries of

People v. Geronimo

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
Oct 23, 2014
H041027 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 23, 2014)
Case details for

People v. Geronimo

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MIGUEL ANGEL GERONIMO, Defendant…

Court:COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

Date published: Oct 23, 2014

Citations

H041027 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 23, 2014)