People v. Duyon - Attempted Robbery Appeal

CA Court of Appeal Opinions

Filed March 9th, 2026

Detected March 9th, 2026

Summary

The California Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment against James Duyon, who appealed after pleading guilty to attempted robbery. The court found no arguable issues in the appeal, upholding the trial court's decision to suspend sentence and place the defendant on probation.

View original document View source feed page

What changed

The California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Six, affirmed the judgment in the case of People v. Duyon (Docket No. B347299). The defendant, James Duyon, appealed after pleading guilty to attempted robbery (Pen. Code, §§ 664/211). The appellate court reviewed the record, found no arguable issues, and affirmed the trial court's decision to suspend imposition of sentence and place the appellant on probation.

This ruling confirms the outcome of the trial court proceedings. For legal professionals involved in criminal appeals, this case serves as an example of a non-precedential opinion where no arguable issues were found, leading to an affirmation of the lower court's judgment. There are no new compliance requirements or deadlines stemming from this specific appellate decision, as it pertains to an individual case outcome.

Source document (simplified)

Support FLP

CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.

Please become a member today.

Join Free.law Now

March 9, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note

People v. Duyon CA2/6

California Court of Appeal

Citations: None known
Docket Number: B347299
Precedential Status: Non-Precedential
Opinion
Authorities (1)
Cited By (0)
Summaries (0)
Similar Cases (0)
PDF

Combined Opinion

Filed 3/9/26 P. v. Duyon 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. B347299
(Super. Ct. No. 2024033607)
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Ventura County)

JAMES DUYON,

Defendant and Appellant.

James Duyon appeals from the judgment after pleading
guilty to one count of attempted robbery. (Pen. Code, §§ 664 /
211.) The court suspended imposition of sentence and placed
appellant on probation subject to various terms and conditions,
with credits for time served in county jail.
Appellant asked the owner of a donut shop if he could use a
phone. The owner handed him the business cell phone to use.
When appellant started to walk away, the owner started after
him. Appellant told the owner not to approach because he had a
knife. Appellant also threw soda crates at the owner. A passerby
who witnessed the incident had appellant hand him the phone,
which he then returned to the owner.
Appellant was charged with attempted robbery. (Pen.
Code, §§ 664/ 211.) He initially filed for mental health diversion,
which the prosecution opposed on the basis appellant, though
eligible, was unsuitable. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36.) Appellant
subsequently did not pursue the diversion request but instead
waived his preliminary hearing and trial rights and pled guilty to
the charge.
We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this appeal.
After counsel examined the record, he filed an opening brief
raising no arguable issues. On December 9, 2025, we advised
appellant by mail that he had 30 days within which to file a
supplemental brief to raise any issues he wished us to consider.
We have not received a response.
We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied no
arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436,
441-443.)
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.