People v. Romo CA2/6

Filed 12/14/15 P. v. Romo CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. B265629 (Super. Ct. No. 1104013) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Santa Barbara County)

v.

JOSE BENIGNO ROMO,

Defendant and Appellant.

In 2005 Jose Benigno Romo was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. He was ordered to pay a restitution fine of $10,000. We affirmed the judgment. (People v. Romo (Jan. 9, 2006, B185612) [nonpub. opn.].) In 2015 Romo made a post-judgment motion to modify the judgment. He claimed that the trial court erred in imposing a $10,000 restitution fine without a hearing on whether he could pay. The trial court denied the motion on the ground it had no jurisdiction to modify the judgment we affirmed. The court also stated that if it had jurisdiction it would deny the motion on the grounds that it is untimely and without merit. Romo appeals the order denying his motion. We appointed counsel to represent Romo in this appeal. After counsel’s examination of the record he filed an opening brief raising no issues.

On September 4, 2015, we advised Romo by mail that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues that he wished to raise on appeal. We have received no response. We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied Romo’s attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.) The judgment is affirmed. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

GILBERT, P. J.

We concur: