People v. Ramirez CA2/8

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 15, 2014B252638California398 words

Opinion

Opinion

Flier, J.

DISCUSSION

We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. After review of the record, appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed an opening brief asking this court to review the record independently pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at page 441. On March 24, 2014, we advised appellant he had 30 days within which to submit any contentions or issues that he wished us to consider. Appellant filed a supplemental letter brief. He argues we should conduct a complete review of the sentencing hearing because “[t]here was a lot of confusion” about whether the evidence was sufficient to establish the alleged priors. He also asserts his current counsel is ineffective on appeal because she has not argued the evidence of his priors was insufficient. Appellant’s contentions are unavailing. The time for reviewing the evidence of his priors or other purported errors made at the sentencing hearing is long past. Appellant’s sentence constituted the final judgment of conviction from which an appeal should have been and was taken. (§ 1237, subd. (a).) He had an opportunity to argue the evidence of his priors was insufficient, and in fact, he asserted in his prior

The appellate…

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.