People v. Camba CA2/8

Filed 2/20/25 P. v. Camba CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B336773

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA503407) v.

VICTOR CAMBA,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Michael Garcia, Judge. Affirmed.

Evan D. Williams, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

**********

In December 2023, defendant and appellant Victor Camba was found guilty by a jury of being a felon in possession of a firearm (Pen. Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1); count 1) and being a felon in possession of ammunition (§ 30305, subd. (a)(1); count 2). During trial, defendant stipulated that he had suffered a prior felony conviction in 2014 for a violation of Vehicle Code section 10851. The court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on formal probation for a period of two years. Defendant was ordered to serve nine days in jail and was given credit for time served. The court suspended fines and fees based on a finding of defendant’s inability to pay, noting defendant had experienced periods of homelessness. This appeal followed. We appointed appellate counsel to represent defendant. Defendant’s appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) in which no issues were raised. The Wende brief included a declaration from counsel in which he explains that he advised defendant he would be filing a Wende brief, forwarded the brief and the record to defendant, advised him of his right to file a supplemental brief and his right to discharge him as his attorney. Counsel also stated his availability to brief, upon request, any issues we may have following our independent review of the case. Defendant did not file a supplemental brief. We have examined the record of proceedings submitted to this court and are satisfied that appointed counsel fully complied with his responsibilities. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106; Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) We find no arguable appellate issues.