Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
Mendocino County Super. Ct. No. SCTMCRCR-0673302
Pollak, J.
Defendant Steven Lamond Perry appeals from a judgment of conviction entered following a jury trial on two theft-related charges. His appointed counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and, after being advised of his right to do so, defendant has filed no supplemental brief. Having conducted an independent review of the record, we find no issue of colorable merit and shall affirm.
Background
On December 19, 2006, defendant and a codefendant were charged with one count of embezzlement (Pen. Code, § 503) and one count of grand theft (Pen. Code, §§ 484, subd. (a), 487, subd. (a)).
At trial, Deborah Fulmor testified that in November 2005 she leased her fully furnished home in Little River to defendant and his wife for a six-month term. Fulmor was planning to spend the winter in Hawaii and return the following April. In February 2006, however, she initiated unlawful detainer proceedings after defendant failed to pay rent. An unlawful detainer judgment was entered in Fulmor’s favor on April 25, 2006.
On May 9, 2006, Fulmor, who was still in Hawaii, received a telephone call from a neighbor in Little River who reported that defendant and his wife were moving furniture out of her home. From his window he watched and reported to Fulmor as defendant and his wife moved three truck loads of furniture from her home. When Fulmor returned home a week later she found that her house was “pretty well cleaned out.” The police later located Fulmor’s furniture at defendant’s new home and in a local antique store.
Defendant admitted removing the furniture from Fulmor’s house. He explained that he did not intend to lease the house furnished and that when he spoke with Fulmor about it she apologized for leaving the furniture there. She told him the furniture was “of no real value to her” and that he “could take whatever it is that they needed . . . to make the house habitable . . . .” Defendant also claimed that Fulmor told him to take the furniture in exchange for all the work he and his wife had done cleaning the house. Defendant’s testimony was contrary to the earlier testimony of Fulmor.
The jury found defendant guilty as charged. The court suspended the imposition of sentence and placed defendant on probation for three years, conditioned upon his serving 240 days in county jail.
Having reviewed the entire record, we find substantial evidence to support defendant’s conviction. (People v. Kraft (2000) 23 Cal.4th 978, 1053.) We are satisfied that defendant’s attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities, and no arguable issues exist. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 123-124; People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)
Disposition
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: McGuiness, P. J., Siggins, J.