Opinion
D075349
09-10-2019
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. WILLIAM CECIL THORNTON, Defendant and Appellant.
John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. CPR180239) APPEAL from a post judgment order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Kathleen M. Lewis, Judge. Affirmed. John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
William Cecil Thornton was convicted of failing to register as a sex offender. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (a).) In December 2018, a petition was filed to revoke Thornton's release on community supervision. Thornton admitted he was in violation of the terms of his release. The court committed Thornton to the county jail for 90 days, to be served concurrently with the sentence in case No. C384420.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified. --------
Thornton has filed a timely notice of appeal from the December order.
Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), indicating he has not been able to identify any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered Thornton the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal, but he has not responded with a supplemental brief or any request for additional time to do so.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Thornton failed to report to his probation officer as required as a condition of his release. Thornton was arrested at a casino and was in possession of a drug pipe and controlled substance.
DISCUSSION
As we have noted, counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, and requests the court to review the record for error. To assist the court, and in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel has identified two possible issues for our consideration: 1) Did defense counsel have a conflict of interest as set forth in the notice of appeal; and 2) Did the trial court abuse its discretion in revoking Thornton's release on community supervision?
We have reviewed the entire record as required by Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Thornton on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The order revoking community release is affirmed.
HUFFMAN, Acting P. J. WE CONCUR: O'ROURKE, J. AARON, J.