P. v. Lester
P. v. Lester
Filed 9/22/08 P. v. Lester CA2/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
Edward Dwayne Lester,
Defendant and Appellant. |
B206851
(Los Angeles County
Super. Ct. No. NA076125) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Charles D. Sheldon, Judge. Affirmed.
Athena Shudde, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Edward Dwayne Lester appeals from the judgment entered following his plea of nolo contendere to carrying a concealed dirk or dagger (Pen. Code, 12020, subd. (a)(4))[1]and his admission that he previously had been convicted of a felony within the meaning of the Three Strikes law ( 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)). The trial court sentenced Lester to four years in prison. We affirm the judgment.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
1. Facts.[2]
At approximately 4:30 p.m. on October 13, 2007, Long Beach Police Officer Dedier Reyes and his partner, Officer Garcia, were on patrol in the area of 60th and Atlantic Streets in the City of Long Beach. Reyes observed Lester, who was holding in his right hand a double edged dagger with a grip on one end. Reyes stopped to investigate. A search of Lester revealed a second dagger, with an approximately two-inch double blade and a grip handle, in his left pocket. Reyes gave both daggers to Garcia, who kept them in his possession until placing them into evidence.
2. Procedural History.
In an information filed November 13, 2007, Lester was charged with one count of carrying a concealed dirk and dagger in violation of section 12020, subdivision (a)(4). It was further alleged that Lester previously had suffered two convictions for robbery ( 211) within the meaning of the Three Strikes law ( 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)).
At proceedings held on December 13, 2007, the People indicated they were willing to offer to strike one of [Lesters two] strikes and allow him to plead to double the mid-term, which would be four years in prison. Lester originally rejected the offer and indicated, although he faced a life sentence, he wished to go to trial. Lester then stated that he and his counsel had a conflict of interest and he wished to have a Marsden[3]hearing.
After the prosecutor left the courtroom, Lester indicated that his counsel had told him he had no real defense to the charge and that if he were to go to trial, he would risk being sentenced to life in prison. Lester stated he would like to have somebody that [was] willing to at least help [him] fight the case if [he] went to trial. The trial court denied Lesters Marsden motion, stating, Shes a good lawyer. [] If she has to go to trial, she will do the best she can for you. [But] [s]he cant make up anything. She can only bring whatever might help you. Shes an experienced lawyer [and knows] whether you have a descent [sic] defense or not. If you dont have a descent [sic] defense, all shes doing is telling the truth[.] [But some] people get disappointed because they think their attorney can be [a] magician[] or something and find something.
At proceedings held on January 9, 2008, Lester decided to take the Peoples offer of four years in prison. Lester waived his right to a trial, to confront the witnesses against him, to present a defense and his privilege against self-incrimination. He then pleaded no contest to one count of carrying a dirk or dagger in violation of section 12020, subdivision (a)(4) and admitted having suffered a prior felony conviction for robbery ( 211) within the meaning of the Three Strikes law ( 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)).
Lester waived arraignment for judgment and sentencing and the trial court imposed the middle term of two years in prison, then doubled it to four years pursuant to the Three Strikes law. Lester was given presentence custody credit for 89 days actually served and 44 days of good time/work time, or a total of 133 days. He was ordered to pay a $200 restitution fine ( 1202.4, subd. (b)), a stayed $200 parole revocation restitution fine ( 1202.45), and a $20 court security fee ( 1465.8, subd. (a)(1)).
Lester filed a timely notice of appeal on March 7, 2008.
This court appointed counsel to represent Lester on appeal on June 13, 2008.
CONTENTIONS
After examination of the record, appointed appellate counsel filed an opening brief which raised no issues and requested this court to conduct an independent review of the record.
By notice filed July 14, 2008, the clerk of this court advised Lester to submit within 30 days any contentions, grounds of appeal or arguments he wished this court to consider. No response has been received to date.
APPELLATE REVIEW
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied Lesters counsel has complied fully with counsels responsibilities. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 278-284; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 443.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
KLEIN, P. J.
We concur:
CROSKEY, J.
KITCHING, J.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney referral.
Analysis and review provided by Vista Property line Lawyers.
San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com
[1] All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
[2] The facts have been taken from the transcript of the preliminary hearing.
[3]People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118.
|
