From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Wright

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division
Jan 13, 2009
2d Crim. B209774 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 13, 2009)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. WAYNE DEAN WRIGHT, Defendant and Appellant. 2d Crim. No. B209774 California Court of Appeal, Second District, Sixth DivisionJanuary 13, 2009

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

Superior Court County of Ventura No. 2007019536, Henry J. Walsh, Judge

California Appellate Project, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, Jonathan B. Steiner, Executive Director and Richard B. Lennon, Staff Attorney, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

PERREN, J.

Wayne Dean Wright appeals the judgment entered after he pleaded guilty to committing a lewd act on a child under the age of 14 (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a)). In exchange for his plea, four other counts of committing a lewd act on a child under the age of 14 with allegations of substantial sexual contact (Pen. Code, § 1203.066, subd. (a)(8)) were dismissed. He was sentenced to the midterm of six years in state prison.

Pursuant to Wright's plea, he agreed that the court could find a factual basis for his plea from the probation officer's report. He also initialed a waiver (People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754) agreeing that dismissed charges could be considered in determining his sentence. In 2002, Wright became the primary caretaker of his seven-year-old daughter A.W. From November 2002 through October 2006, Wright sexually molested A.W. on five different occasions. A.W.'s sister contacted the police in 2007 after A.W. told her about the incidents.

On June 10, 2008, prior to sentencing, Wright made a motion pursuant to People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118, for appointment of new counsel. The trial court denied the motion.

We appointed counsel to represent Wright in this appeal. After counsel’s examination of the record, he filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised. On October 24, 2008, we advised Wright that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. We received no response.

We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that Wright's attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: YEGAN, Acting P.J., COFFEE, J.


Summaries of

People v. Wright

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division
Jan 13, 2009
2d Crim. B209774 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 13, 2009)
Case details for

People v. Wright

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. WAYNE DEAN WRIGHT, Defendant and…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division

Date published: Jan 13, 2009

Citations

2d Crim. B209774 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 13, 2009)