P. v. Riley
Filed 12/9/13 P. v. Riley 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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.
LAWRENCE
VAN RILEY,
Defendant and Appellant.
C073922
(Super. Ct. No.
CM038023)
On January 17, 2013, officers conducting
a postrelease community supervision search of defendant Lawrence Van Riley’s
residence found 6.3 grams of methamphetamine, $1,200 in cash, Ziploc baggies, a
syringe containing 25 cc’s of methamphetamine, and other drug paraphernalia.
Defendant pleaded
no contest to possession of
methamphetamine for sale. (Health &
Saf. Code, § 11378.) Pursuant to
the plea agreement, a prior strike allegation was dismissed with a
v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754.)
The trial court sentenced defendant to three years in state prison,
imposed various fines and fees, and awarded 156 days’ presentence credit (78
actual and 78 conduct).
Defendant
appeals. He did not obtain a
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. (
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.
RAYE ,
P. J.
We concur:
NICHOLSON , J.
HOCH ,
J.
