People v. Vasquez CA2/4
- Proceeding
- appeal from an order
- Trial court
- Superior Court of Los Angeles County
- Trial judge
- Robert Serna
- Outcome
- affirmed — Affirmed.
- Area
- criminal
- Panel
- Audrey B. Collins (author), Helen E. Zukin
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
Filed 2/21/25 P. v. Vasquez CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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(a). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115(a).
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR
THE PEOPLE, B336241
Plaintiff and Respondent, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KA133519 v.
JESUS VASQUEZ,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Robert Serna, Judge. Affirmed. Christina Vanarelli, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. In 2023, defendant and appellant Jesus Vasquez pleaded no contest to a violation of Penal Code section 29800, subdivision (a)(1), possession of firearm by a felon. As part of a negotiated disposition, the trial court sentenced him to a term of two years in state prison. Vasquez timely appealed, and we appointed counsel to represent him. On November 7, 2024, counsel for Vasquez filed a brief raising no issues on appeal and asking us to review the record independently. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) On November 12, 2024, we sent Vasquez a letter informing him of his right to file within 30 days a supplemental brief raising any appellate issues he wished us to consider. We received no response. We have independently examined the entire record. We discern no arguable issue on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 443.) Accordingly, we affirm. By virtue of counsel's compliance with the Wende procedure and our review of the record, appellant has received adequate and effective appellate review of the judgment. (See Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 278-279.)
2 DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
DAUM, J.* We concur:
COLLINS, J.
ZUKIN, Acting P.J.
* Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article IV, section 6 of the California Constitution.
Cites, in this corpus
- People v. Wende Crim. 20851 · 1979-10-12