1

Filed 8/1/14 P. v. Emerson CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication 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

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Yolo)

----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

ERIC LAMAR EMERSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

C075271

(Super. Ct. No. CRF132186)

Appointed counsel for defendant Eric Lamar Emerson asked this court to review 

the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. 

Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) Finding no arguable error that would result in a 

disposition more favorable to defendant, we will affirm the judgment.
2

I

In March 2013, defendant (a registered sex offender) told his parole officer, John 

Carbone, that he was moving to West Sacramento. Carbone told defendant he would 

need to register his new address in West Sacramento no later than April 1, 2013. Shortly 

thereafter, Carbone lost contact with defendant. 

Defendant failed to register his new address. Accordingly, at Carbone’s request, 

on May 29, 2013, West Sacramento Police Detective Eric Angle and Detective Palmer 

went to a trailer park in West Sacramento, looking for defendant. Angle thought he saw 

defendant walking down the street, but was unsure; he and Palmer then made their way 

toward the residence of Jim Gipson, defendant’s uncle. At the Gipson residence, they 

learned defendant had walked to the store. Palmer found defendant at the store and 

brought him back to the Gipson residence. 

Angle interviewed Gipson, who told Angle that he, defendant, and another relative 

moved to West Sacramento on March 20, 2013. He confirmed that defendant had been 

living with him since that date. 

Angle also interviewed defendant. Defendant told Angle he moved to West 

Sacramento with Gipson after he was evicted from his Sacramento residence. Defendant 

acknowledged he had a duty to register as a sex offender; he registered in Sacramento 

following his release from prison but failed to register in West Sacramento. Defendant 

never told Angle that Carbone gave him permission not to register in West Sacramento. 

Upon further investigation, Angle found no evidence that Carbone ever told defendant he 

was not required to register in West Sacramento. 

Defendant was subsequently arrested and charged with failing to update his sex 

offender registration. (Pen. Code, § 290.013, subd. (a).) The People further alleged 

defendant served seven prior prison terms. (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b).) Defendant 

pleaded no contest to the charge in exchange for the low term of 16 months in state 

prison. The trial court ordered defendant to pay various fines and fees, awarded him a 
3

total of 285 days of presentence custody credit, and dismissed the enhancement 

allegation. 

Defendant appeals; the trial court denied his request for a certificate of probable 

cause. 

II

Appointed counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and 

asked this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues 

on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the 

right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing the opening brief. 

More than 30 days elapsed and we received no communication from defendant.

Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error 

that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

 MAURO , J.

We concur:

 BUTZ , Acting P. J.

 DUARTE , J.