People v. Guillen CA4/3
Opinion
Opinion
Aronson, J.
facts of the case, the procedural history, and possible legal issues with citations to the record and appropriate authority, but raised no specific issues, and asked this court to review the record to determine whether there were any arguable issues. Counsel did not argue against his client or assert the appeal was frivolous. Counsel also submitted a
declaration stating he had advised Guillen of the nature of the brief, stated he would send Guillen a copy of the brief and appellate record, and had informed him he could file a brief on his own behalf. Counsel also stated he was not requesting to withdraw, but he
would advise Guillen he could move to have counsel relieved. Finally, counsel informed us the principal issue at the restitution hearing was whether the rules of evidence applied. (See People v. Prosser (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 682, 692 [the rules of evidence do not apply at a restitution hearing given that it is part of the sentencing process]; accord, People v. Baumann (1985) 176 Cal.App.3d 67, 81.) We gave Guillen 30 days to file a supplemental brief. He did not avail himself of the opportunity. For the reasons
expressed below, we affirm the order.