From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Weathers

California Court of Appeals, Third District, Sacramento
Oct 22, 2009
No. C061582 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 22, 2009)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LARREL WEATHERS, Defendant and Appellant. C061582 California Court of Appeal, Third District, Sacramento October 22, 2009

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Super. Ct. No. 07F02188

HULL, J.

Pursuant to a negotiated settlement, defendant Larrel Weathers pleaded no contest to burglary and to assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury in exchange for which he received a stipulated six-year sentence and the dismissal of additional counts. The court imposed restitution fines of $1,400 in accordance with Penal Code sections 1202.4, subdivision (a) and 1202.45.

Facts and Proceedings

On March 5, 2007, around 2:30 p.m., the victim, a 51-year-old male, was at home when he noticed an older green Mustang parked at the end of the street. Suspicious, the victim went to investigate and saw one male come out from a fenced area of his neighbor’s house and two additional male adults coming from a location behind another residence. The victim called out to them, they approached him, knocked him to the ground and hit and kicked him. The victim identified defendant as one of his assailants. They ran when a neighbor yelled at them.

Later that night, while police officers were responding to a burglary in progress call they saw an older green Mustang traveling at a high rate of speed with its headlights off. They stopped the vehicle, one person ran and the driver and a passenger stayed with the car. Defendant was the driver. Inside the vehicle was an Xbox which had just been stolen in a residential burglary.

Discussion

We appointed counsel to represent defendant on the appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed and we received no communication from defendant. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

Disposition

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur:, SCOTLAND, P. J., CANTIL-SAKAUYE, J.


Summaries of

People v. Weathers

California Court of Appeals, Third District, Sacramento
Oct 22, 2009
No. C061582 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 22, 2009)
Case details for

People v. Weathers

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LARREL WEATHERS, Defendant and…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Third District, Sacramento

Date published: Oct 22, 2009

Citations

No. C061582 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 22, 2009)