P. v. Caylor
Filed 4/24/13 P. v. Caylor 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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,
Plaintiff and
Respondent,
v.
VINCENT ORLANDO CAYLOR,
Defendant and
Appellant.
2d Crim. No.
B240882
(Super. Ct. No.
2011031647)
(Ventura
County)
Vincent Orlando Caylor
appeals from the judgment entered after he pleaded guilty to
& Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) and admitted he had one prior strike
conviction (Pen. Code §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)) and four
prior prison term allegations (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). Appellant entered a negotiated plea after the
court denied his motion to suppress
evidence. (Pen. Code, § 1538.5.) The trial court struck appellant’s prior
strike conviction, suspended imposition of sentence, and placed him on formal
probation for 36 months, with various terms and conditions.
On September 1, 2011, at 12:43 p.m., Port Hueneme Police Officers saw appellant
fidgeting and twitching as he walked across the street. The officers followed him into a nearby
parking lot and questioned him.
Appellant’s constricted pupils, red watery eyes, missing front teeth,
and the chemical odor of his breath indicated he was under the influence of
methamphetamine. At the officers’
request, appellant briefly closed his eyes; he had eyelid tremors. During a pat-down search, one of the officers
found a glass methamphetamine pipe and crystal methamphetamine in appellant’s
pants pockets.
We appointed
appeal. Counsel filed a brief raising no issues and requesting our
436. We notified appellant that he had
30 days in which to advise us of any claims he wished us to consider. We have
received no response from appellant.
We have reviewed the
entire record and are satisfied that appellant’s attorney has fully complied
with her responsibilities and that no arguable
issues exist. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 123-124 ;
441.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is
affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
PERREN,
J.
We concur:
GILBERT, P.J.
YEGAN, J.
>
Bruce A. Young, Judge
Superior
Court County
of Ventura
______________________________
Lyn A. Woodward , under
appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for
Plaintiff and Respondent.
