Opinion
H031838
4-15-2008
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. KATHLEEN MARGARET LADD, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Defendant Kathleen Margaret Ladd appeals from a judgment of conviction entered after she pleaded no contest to buying, receiving, concealing or withholding stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a)), and misdemeanor possession of marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11357, subd. (b)), and admitted that she committed the stolen property offense when she was out of custody on bail on a felony charge of possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) within the meaning of Penal Code section 12022.1. On June 8, 2007, the trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on formal probation for a period of three years. Conditions of probation included a six-month jail term, substance abuse counseling, and restitution.
Defendant has filed a timely notice of appeal based on the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
On April 4, 2007, a Santa Clara police officer observed Mark Daniel Rodriguez get out of a car, approach a bank of mailboxes at an apartment complex, open them, and rummage through them. Defendant stood nearby, looking around in all directions. The officer believed that Rodriguez was stealing mail and defendant was acting as a lookout. As the officer approached them, defendant looked towards Rodriguez, stating, "Cops, cops." Both Rodriguez and defendant were apprehended, and officers found a small amount of marijuana in defendants jacket pocket.
The car Rodriguez was driving had been stolen the day before. In the car, police found various articles of stolen property, including golf clubs and pieces of mail.
Defendant admitted to police that she owned the marijuana found in her jacket. She said she had driven with Rodriguez to the apartment complex, but did not know the car was stolen. She denied seeing Rodriguez break into any mailboxes, and denied acting as a lookout. She further denied having possession of any stolen mail.
DISCUSSION
We appointed counsel to represent defendant in this court. Appointed counsel has filed an opening brief which states the case and the facts but raises no specific issues. We have notified defendant of her right to submit written argument on her own behalf within 30 days. This period has elapsed and we have received no written argument from defendant.
Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we have reviewed the entire record and we have concluded that there is no arguable issue on appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We Concur:
Bamattre-Manoukian, Acting P.J.
Mihara, J. --------------- Notes: The facts are taken from the Summary of Offense in the probation report.