People v. McCants CA2/6

Opinion

Filed 8/10/26 P. v. McCants CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B350361 (Super. Ct. No. 2022024947) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Ventura County)

v. LEWIS DEVON MCCANTS, JR., Defendant and Appellant.

Lewis Devon McCants, Jr., was charged with three counts of first degree residential burglary (Pen. Code,1 § 459, counts 1-3) and conspiracy to commit residential burglaries (§ 182, subd. (a)(1), count 4). The complaint also alleged, as to each count, that the manner in which the crime was carried out indicated planning, sophistication, and professionalism. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421(a)(8).)

1 All further statutory designations are to the Penal Code. Appellant waived his preliminary hearing and trial rights, pleaded guilty to one count of residential burglary (§ 459, count 1), and admitted the special allegation (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421(a)(8)). The trial court sentenced appellant to state prison for the lower term of two years. Appellant requested a Certificate of Probable Cause to challenge his plea, which the trial court granted. We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. After an examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief that raises no arguable issues. On June 4, 2026, we notified appellant by mail that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. No supplemental brief was filed. Appellant entered a residence while the homeowner was away. When the homeowner returned, she discovered every room inside the home was ransacked and a custom-built door to the master bedroom had been shattered. A large painted art piece had been removed, and a “fast charging” iPhone cable was taken. We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that appellant’s counsel has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Disposition The judgment is affirmed. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

YEGAN, J. We concur:

CODY, P. J. BALTODANO, J.

2 Paul H. Kawai, Judge Superior Court County of Ventura ______________________________ Jennifer Peabody, Executive Director, Richard B. Lennon, Staff Attorney, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance by Respondent.