Filed 12/15/25 P. v. Christie CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. B344995 (Super. Ct. No. 25CR00463) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Santa Barbara County) v. MICHAEL JAMES CHRISTIE, Defendant and Appellant.

Michael James Christie (“appellant”) appeals following his guilty plea to one count of possession of ammunition by a felon. (Pen. Code, § 30305, subd. (a)(1).)

Police officers saw appellant loitering in a private alley in Santa Maria known for drug abuse, fights, trespassing, and other criminal activity. 1 They had a letter of authority from the property owner allowing them to enter the alley to enforce the law while the business was closed. They confirmed appellant was The facts are derived from the preliminary hearing transcript and sentencing report because appellant pleaded guilty to the charge. on active probation and performed a pat down search. His front jacket pocket contained a live round of .40 caliber ammunition.

Appellant later moved to suppress all evidence gathered during the search. The trial court denied the motion and held him to answer. Appellant waived his right to a jury trial and pled guilty pursuant to an agreement that reduced his charge to a misdemeanor. He received an agreed sentence of six months in jail with credit for 105 days served. Appellant filed a notice of appeal challenging the denial of his motion. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b).) He was released while this appeal was pending.

We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this appeal.

Counsel filed an opening brief raising no arguable issues. On August 14, 2025, we advised appellant by mail that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. That notice was returned as undeliverable. Counsel and the court are unable to locate appellant because he has been transient since his release from custody. The court did not receive a supplemental brief.

We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that appellant’s counsel fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 443; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 126.)

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

CODY, J.

We concur:

YEGAN, Acting P. J. BALTODANO, J.

Stephen Dunkle, Judge Superior Court County of Santa Barbara ______________________________ Richard B. Lennon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.