P. v. Daniels
Filed 9/19/07 P. v. Daniels CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Butte)
----
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. PAUL DANIELS, Defendant and Appellant. | C054775 (Super. Ct. No. CM020771) |
In February 2004, a Paradise police officer saw defendant Paul Daniels, whom he knew from prior contacts, standing next to a car with an open trunk. When defendant saw the officer, he immediately closed the trunk and then identified himself with a false name. Defendant consented to a search of the car. In the trunk were two plastic bags containing pseudoephedrine tablets. Nine empty cartons of pseudoephedrine were recovered from a nearby trash can. Defendant claimed he was transporting the tablets to an individual who manufactured methamphetamine.
In April 2004, defendant pleaded guilty to possession of pseudoephedrine with intent to manufacture methamphetamine. (Health & Saf. Code, 11383, subd. (c)(1).) In June 2004, defendant was placed on probation for five years on various terms, including a Johnson waiver,[1]and drug court conditions.
In March 2006, a petition was filed alleging defendant violated his probation by testing positive for alcohol. He admitted the violation. He was placed at the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) for a 90-day diagnostic evaluation. (Pen. Code, 1203.03; further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.) In June 2006, defendant was reinstated on probation, again with a Johnson waiver.
In December 2006, a petition was filed alleging defendant violated his probation by driving on a suspended license and gambling at a casino. Defendant admitted the gambling allegation, and the driving allegation was dismissed with a Harvey waiver.[2]
Defendant was sentenced to state prison for four years, awarded 30 days of custody credit and 14 days of conduct credit, and ordered to pay a $200 restitution fine ( 1202.4), a $200 restitution fine suspended unless parole is revoked ( 1202.45), a $170 laboratory analysis fee (Health & Saf. Code, 11372.5, subd. (a)) including penalty assessments, a $510 drug program fee (Health & Saf. Code, 11372.7) including penalty assessments, and a $20 court security fee ( 1465.8).
Defendant stipulated that he was addicted to narcotics. Criminal proceedings were suspended and defendant was committed to CDCR for placement at the California Rehabilitation Center.
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NICHOLSON , Acting P.J.
We concur:
HULL, J.
CANTIL-SAKAUYE , J.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney referral.
Analysis and review provided by Vista Property line Lawyers.
[1]People v. Johnson (1978) 82 Cal.App.3d 183.
[2]People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754.
