From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ruiz

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
Feb 14, 2008
No. D051073 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 14, 2008)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOSEPH RUIZ, Defendant and Appellant. D051073 California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, First Division February 14, 2008

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Nos. SCN209607 & SCN224910 K. Michael Kirkman, Judge.

McINTYRE, Acting P. J.

In 2006 Joseph Ruiz entered a negotiated guilty plea to one count of possessing a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)) in case No. SCN209607. The trial court granted probation for three years.

In 2007 Ruiz entered a negotiated guilty plea to one count of commercial burglary (Pen. Code, § 459) in case No. SCN224910. Ruiz also admitted he had one prior serious/violent felony conviction or strike (Pen. Code, § 667, subds. (b)-(i)). The court sentenced Ruiz to the stipulated prison term of two years eight months for the burglary and found he was in violation of his probation in case No. SCN209607. The court sentenced him to 16 months in prison for the probation violation with 213 days of credit.

FACTS

On March 24, 2006, a San Diego County Sheriff deputy searched Ruiz in the parking lot of a gas station. Ruiz had a cigarette carton in his waistband; inside the carton contained a bag of rock cocaine, which weighed 1.1 grams.

On February 10, 2007, Ruiz took merchandise valued at $168.04 at a Home Depot store and concealed the items in the waistband of his pants. Ruiz left the store without paying for the merchandise. After Ruiz left the store, two loss prevention officers employed by Home Depot followed him outside. After being approached by one of the loss prevention officers, Ruiz started to run away, but another loss prevention officer caught him. After a brief struggle, the employee handcuffed Ruiz and escorted him to the store.

DISCUSSION

Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief setting forth evidence in the superior court. Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks this court to 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 trial court abused its discretion when it denied probation and imposed a lower-term sentence for the probation violation in case No. SCN209607; and (2) whether Ruiz received the stipulated sentence in case No. SCN224910.

We granted Ruiz 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, including the possible issues referred to by appellant's counsel, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issues. Competent counsel has represented Ruiz on this appeal.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

WE CONCUR: O'ROURKE, J., AARON, J.


Summaries of

People v. Ruiz

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
Feb 14, 2008
No. D051073 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 14, 2008)
Case details for

People v. Ruiz

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOSEPH RUIZ, Defendant and…

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

Date published: Feb 14, 2008

Citations

No. D051073 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 14, 2008)