From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Gray

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
Apr 9, 2008
No. D051789 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 9, 2008)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LONEL GRAY, Defendant and Appellant. D051789 California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, First Division April 9, 2008

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County Super. Ct. No. SCD204820, David J. Danielsen, Judge.

NARES, Acting P. J.

Lonel Gray entered a negotiated guilty plea to one count of elder theft (Pen. Code, § 368, subd. (d)) and admitted he had a prior serious/violent felony or strike conviction (Pen. Code, § 667, subds. (b)-(i)). In exchange for the guilty plea and admission, six other charges—one count of grand theft, one count of burglary, and four counts of forgery—were dismissed. The trial court denied Gray's request to strike his prior serious/violent felony conviction and sentenced him to four years in prison.

FACTS

Gray cashed checks on the bank account of James Bradley, who rented a room from Gray's mother. Bradley had known Gray for "a long, long, long time." Gray found Bradley's checkbook outside his mother's house, made out checks to himself and friends, and forged Bradley's signature on the checks. Bradley was 68 years old.

Gray cashed Bradley's checks for approximately six months. The total amount of the forged checks was approximately $1,775.

DISCUSSION

Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief setting forth evidence in the superior court. Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks that this court review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel refers to as possible, but not arguable, issues: (1) whether the court abused its discretion by refusing to strike Gray's prior serious/violent felony conviction; and (2) whether Gray may challenge the validity of his plea.

We granted Gray permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not responded.

A review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738 has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issues. Competent counsel has represented Gray on this appeal.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

WE CONCUR:HALLER, J., IRION, J.


Summaries of

People v. Gray

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
Apr 9, 2008
No. D051789 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 9, 2008)
Case details for

People v. Gray

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LONEL GRAY, Defendant and…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division

Date published: Apr 9, 2008

Citations

No. D051789 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 9, 2008)