P. v. Ramos
Filed 2/25/09 P. v. Ramos CA6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. PEDRO MEDINA RAMOS, Defendant and Appellant. | H032981 (Monterey County Super.Ct.No. SS072551A) |
Pedro Medina Ramos, the defendant herein, pleaded no contest to possessing a controlled substance for sale (Health & Saf. Code, 11378) and possessing an unlawful substance while armed with a loaded and operable firearm (id., 11370.1, subd. (a)). The trial court sentenced him to four years in state prison.
Counsel for defendant has filed an opening brief that states the case and facts but raises no issues. We notified defendant of his right to submit written argument on his own behalf, but he did not do so.
FACTS
We derive the facts from the probation report. On August 23, 2007, police raided a Salinas apartment after buying methamphetamine from someone there. Defendant, the apartments resident, was found asleep on a couch with a loaded handgun within reach, $2,280 in cash on his person, and a key in his pocket. The police used the key to open coin acceptance devices in the apartment buildings laundry room. They found a quantity exceeding one-half pound of crystal methamphetamine in one of the devices. They also found in the vicinity a bag holding two scales, 76 bindles of methamphetamine, and $3,700 in $100 bills. ~(CT 29-31.)~
DISCUSSION
We have reviewed the entire record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, keeping in mind that our review is limited to grounds for appeal that occurred after entry of defendants no contest plea and do not affect the pleas validity. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b)(1), (b)(4)(B).) We agree with counsel for defendant that there is no arguable issue on appeal. Therefore we will affirm the judgment.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
___________________________________
Duffy, J.
WE CONCUR.
______________________________________
Bamattre-Manoukian, Acting P. J.
______________________________________
McAdams, J.
Publication courtesy of San Diego pro bono legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Poway Property line attorney.
