People v. Williams CA5

Filed 9/9/16 P. v. Williams CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, F071635 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Fresno Super. Ct. No. F15900061) v.

DARRON GENE WILLIAMS, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Don Penner, Judge. Mark J. Shusted, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Levy, Acting P.J., Poochigian, J. and Franson, J.

INTRODUCTION Appellant/defendant Darron Gene Williams pleaded no contest to several felony counts based on presenting a fraudulent check to pay for medical services and was sentenced to 32 months in prison. On appeal, his appellate counsel has filed a brief which summarizes the facts with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) We affirm. FACTS1 On January 2, 2015, Selma Police Officer Caci Fain went to the Logan Street Medical Group to investigate a possible check fraud case in progress. The financial manager reported that defendant was at the clinic and received medical services. He had been to the clinic before. He presented a check to pay for those services, however, the check did not look right, and the manager called the issuing bank and learned the check was no good. Officer Fain examined the check, which was drawn from the United Local Credit Union of Fresno. There were two names printed on the check as the account holders: “James Edward” and “Linda Chavez.” The check was made out to the medical group for $90, and was signed by “James Edward.” Defendant’s name was not on the check. Officer Fain spoke to defendant, who was waiting in an examination room, and asked about the check. Defendant said his cousin filled out the check and gave it to him because defendant needed to get some care from the doctor. Fain asked for the cousin’s name and additional information. Defendant refused to answer; Fain arrested him. Defendant was taken to the police department. He was advised of the warnings pursuant to pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 and agreed to answer