From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Kley

California Court of Appeals, Third District, Butte
Jun 27, 2007
No. C053390 (Cal. Ct. App. Jun. 27, 2007)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SEAN CHRISTOPHER KLEY, Defendant and Appellant. C053390 California Court of Appeal, Third District, Butte, June 27, 2007

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Sup.Ct. No. CM025097

MORRISON, J.

Defendant Sean Christopher Kley and Daniel Hill fraudulently used a stolen bank debit card belonging to Christopher Awad at two Chico stores and a fast-foods restaurant. On May 14, 2006, the card was fraudulently used to purchase items at Wal-Mart. The following two days the card was fraudulently used at Spencer’s and Jack-in-the-Box. Wal-Mart and Spencer’s had video surveillance cameras, and Awad identified defendant and Hill from the videotapes.

Defendant entered a negotiated plea of no contest to second degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459; count 1) in exchange for dismissal of the remaining count [second degree burglary; count 2] with a waiver pursuant to People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754.

The court suspended imposition of sentence and granted probation for a term of three years subject to certain terms and conditions including 90 days in county jail with 13 days credit, a $200 restitution fine, a $200 probation revocation restitution fine and $940.31 in victim restitution, with jurisdiction reserved, to be paid jointly and severally with Hill.

Defendant appeals. He did not obtain a certificate of probable cause (Pen. Code, § 1237.5).

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 elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: SCOTLAND , P.J., CANTIL-SAKAUYE , J.


Summaries of

People v. Kley

California Court of Appeals, Third District, Butte
Jun 27, 2007
No. C053390 (Cal. Ct. App. Jun. 27, 2007)
Case details for

People v. Kley

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SEAN CHRISTOPHER KLEY, Defendant…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Third District, Butte

Date published: Jun 27, 2007

Citations

No. C053390 (Cal. Ct. App. Jun. 27, 2007)