P.

P. v. Zingerle CA2/4

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 23, 2013B246641California310 words

Opinion

Opinion

Suzukawa, J.

DISCUSSION

Defendant‟s appointed appellate counsel filed a brief raising no issues and asked this court to independently review the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. On April 18, 2003, we sent a letter to defendant advising him of the nature of the brief that had been filed and informing him that he had 30 days within which to file a brief raising any issues that he wished us to consider. On April 26, we received a letter from defendant. He argued the sentence he received was too harsh, given his conduct and lack of a serious record. “[Penal Code] [s]ection 1237 permits a defendant to appeal in two circumstances: (1) from a „final judgment of conviction‟; or (2) from any order made after judgment which affects the substantial rights of the party.” (People v. Pritchett (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 190, 193, fn. omitted.) Defendant‟s appeal is not from the final judgment.

1 On February 25, 2013, we received a letter from defendant, wherein he states that he received an eight-year sentence.

2 Indeed, we cannot determine when sentence was imposed. Thus, his appeal is cognizable only if we find that the court‟s January 17, 2013 order was an “order made after…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.