IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Lassen)
May 17, 2011
THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
JOHN NORWOOD MARSH, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
(Super. Ct. No. CR027514)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Duarte, J.
P. v. Marsh
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
Appointed counsel for defendant John Norwood Marsh has asked this court to review the record to determine whether there exist any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) We shall affirm the judgment.
The Lassen County Sheriff's Department received a report that defendant, a convicted felon recently discharged from parole, was in possession of a firearm.*fn1 In a recorded telephone conversation with the reporter, defendant admitted that he was in possession of the gun. During the subsequent service of a search warrant on his residence, defendant admitted that he had a gun in a kitchen drawer. A search of the drawer yielded a revolver, a holster, a loaded ammunition clip, and several cartridges of ammunition.
Defendant pled guilty to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. (Pen. Code,*fn2 § 12021, subd. (a)(1).) In exchange, a prior prison term allegation was dismissed and his state prison exposure was limited to 16 months. (§ 667.5, subd. (b).)
On August 31, 2010, the trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on probation for three years with conditions including one year of incarceration, a $200 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)(1)), and a $200 probation revocation restitution fine (§ 1202.44). The trial court also imposed a 10 percent administrative fee on the restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (l)), that totaled $20 and was added to the restitution fine as noted in the order of probation.*fn3
He was awarded 17 days of custody credit (actual time).*fn4 Defendant's request for a certificate of probable cause was granted.
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on 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. (Wende, supra, 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 have received no communication from defendant.
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no other arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: BLEASE , Acting P. J. BUTZ , J.