P. v. Cohen
Filed 1/14/09 P. v. Cohen CA4/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. HULLIE CARROLL COHEN, Defendant and Appellant. | D053174 (Super. Ct. No. SCD204897) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Jeffrey F. Fraser, Judge. Affirmed.
Hullie Carroll Cohen entered a negotiated guilty plea to possession of cocaine for sale (Health & Saf. Code, 11351.5) and admitted an allegation under Penal Code section 1203.07, subdivision (a)(11) that he had previously been convicted of selling a controlled substance. Under the plea bargain, the parties stipulated to a five-year prison term. The prosecution agreed to dismiss the remaining charge and allegations; the allegations would have exposed Cohen to an additional four years in prison. The court imposed a five-year prison term in accordance with the plea bargain.
Cohen did not obtain a certificate of probable cause.
FACTS
On February 22, 2007, Cohen sold $20 worth of cocaine to an undercover San Diego police officer during a "buy-bust" police operation.
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief setting forth evidence in the superior court. Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel refers to as a possible, but not arguable, issue: whether Cohen was required to obtain a certificate of probable cause to challenge the imposition of a stipulated sentence.
We granted Cohen permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not responded.
A review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, including the possible issue referred to by
appellate counsel, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issues. Competent counsel has represented Cohen on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
AARON, J.
WE CONCUR:
BENKE, Acting P. J.
O'ROURKE, J.
Publication Courtesy of San Diego County Legal Resource Directory.
Analysis and review provided by El Cajon Property line attorney.
