Opinion
A101236.
7-30-2003
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOLEEN UZAREWICZ-LEWALLEN, Defendant and Appellant.
Joleen Uzarewicz-Lewallen appeals from prison sentences imposed after she pled no contest in two cases and her probation was revoked in a third case. Her court-appointed counsel has briefed no issues and asks this court to review the record under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 158 Cal. Rptr. 839, 600 P.2d 1071. We have done so and affirm.
Appellant, who was charged with a number of offenses on several occasions, was represented by counsel at all stages of the proceedings. Pursuant to negotiated dispositions, she pled no contest to forgery and receiving stolen property in Case No. 188082 in September 2001, to receiving stolen property in Case No. 201978 in September 2002, and to possession of a controlled substance (methamphetamine) in case No. 202215 in September 2002. The record, which includes plea forms signed by appellant, demonstrates she was fully informed of her rights and waived them freely and voluntarily in each case. There was a factual basis for the courts acceptance of the no contest plea in each case.
The court initially suspended imposition of sentence and placed appellant on probation in Case No. 188082, including a condition that she serve 60 days in county jail. After appellant pled no contest and was convicted in Case Nos. 201978 and 202215, however, her probation was revoked. Appellant was sentenced in all three cases on December 16, 2002. In Case No. 201978, the court denied probation and sentenced defendant to the middle term of two years, to be served concurrently with the sentences in the other two cases. In Case No. 202215, appellant was sentenced to the middle term of two years, to be served concurrently with the sentences imposed in the other two cases. In Case No. 188082, the court declined to reinstate probation and sentenced appellant to the middle term of two years in state prison for the forgery, with a concurrent two year middle term for receiving stolen property. In each case, appellants sentence was consistent with the terms of the plea bargain.
A restitution fee of $ 200 was also imposed, along with a probation fee of $ 250.
Appellant received 217 days custody credits in Case No. 188082, and 157 days custody credits in Case Nos. 201978 and 202215. Restitution fines were also imposed ($ 200 in Case No. 188082, $ 400 in Case No. 201978, and $ 200 in Case No. 202215), along with suspended parole revocation fines in an equal amount.
There are no meritorious issues to be argued.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: McGuiness, P.J. Parrilli, J.