From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Purcell

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division
Dec 18, 2008
No. E045889 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 18, 2008)

Opinion

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Appeal from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County, No. FNE800029, Joseph R. Brisco, Judge.

David K. Rankin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


OPINION

RAMIREZ, P.J.

On May 6, 2008, pursuant to Penal Code section 859a, defendant pled nolo contendere to a violation of section 288, subdivision (a), as charged in count one of the felony complaint filed by the District Attorney of San Bernardino County. In accordance with the negotiated disposition, defendant was committed to state prison for three (3) years less custody credits and the remaining counts and special allegations were dismissed and stricken on motion of the district attorney. (§ 1385.)

All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.

Defendant timely filed a notice of appeal challenging matters not affecting the validity of the plea.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The factual basis stated that: “ . . . on or about March 26, 2008, defendant did willfully and unlawfully lewdly commit a lewd and lascivious act upon the body of certain parts of the victim, . . . a child under the age of 14, with the intent of arousing feelings and do[ing] psychological damage of either the defendant or the child.”

Defendant appealed, and upon his request this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493] setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record.

We offered the defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.

We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: HOLLENHORST, J., GAUT, J.


Summaries of

People v. Purcell

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division
Dec 18, 2008
No. E045889 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 18, 2008)
Case details for

People v. Purcell

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. BOBBY J. PURCELL, Defendant and…

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

Date published: Dec 18, 2008

Citations

No. E045889 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 18, 2008)