People v. Wimbley

Full title: THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. HAROLD L. WIMBLEY, Defendant and…

Court: COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX

Date published: Dec 20, 2011

2d Crim. No. B232024 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 20, 2011)

Opinion

2d Crim. No. B232024 Super. Ct. No. KA087064

12-20-2011

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. HAROLD L. WIMBLEY, Defendant and Appellant.

PERREN

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule

(Los Angeles County)

Harold L. Wimbley appeals the order revoking his probation and sentencing him to a six-year prison term following his guilty plea conviction for possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)) and other charges. Appellant also admitted he had suffered a prior strike conviction (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)).

In September of 2010, appellant struck the victim on the back of the head with a hoe after the two of them got into a dispute over a debt. Appellant was subsequently convicted of simple assault, in violation of Penal Code section 240. Reinstatement of probation was denied and appellant was sentenced to six years in state prison, consisting of the upper term of three years on the count of possessing a controlled substance, doubled for the strike prior.

We appointed counsel to represent appellant on this appeal. After examining the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues and requesting that this court independently examine the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.

On October 6, 2011, we advised appellant that he had 30 days in which to submit a written brief or letter raising any contentions or arguments he wished us to consider. Appellant did not respond.

We have examined the entire record. We are satisfied that appellant's counsel has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)

The judgment (order revoking probation) is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

PERREN, J. We concur:

GILBERT, P.J.

COFFEE, J.

Carol Elswick, Judge Superior Court County of Los Angeles

Athena Shudde, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Appellant. No appearance for Respondent.