P. v. Weaver
Filed 10/12/11 P. v. Weaver CA1/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DONNELL WEAVER, Defendant and Appellant. | A127970 (San Francisco County Super. Ct. No. 208097, 2382834) |
Defendant Donnell Weaver appeals after his probation was revoked and he was sentenced to prison. His counsel has filed an opening brief raising no issues and asking this court for an independent review of the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant has been informed of his right to personally file a supplemental brief, but he has not done so.
Defendant was charged with three counts of unlawful possession of a controlled substance for purchase or sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351) (counts one, two, and three) and one count of unlawful possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)) (count four). The complaint included three prior conviction allegations. Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant pled guilty to count one. On December 17, 2008, the trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on three years’ probation. Among the conditions of probation, defendant was required to submit to being searched by a police or probation officer with or without a warrant or probable cause, and not possess illegal drugs.
The District Attorney moved to revoke probation. Evidence at the probation revocation hearing indicated that on January 5, 2009, a plain-clothes police officer saw defendant near the intersection of Turk and Leavenworth in San Francisco, appearing to engage in a hand-to-hand drug transaction. The officer recognized defendant, and knew that he was subject to a search condition. He and another officer stopped defendant and searched him. They found narcotics, including suspected heroin, cocaine base, and morphine, and $509 in small denominations, mainly $20 bills.
The trial court found defendant in violation of his probation. The court revoked probation and sentenced defendant to the upper term of four years, awarded 650 days of presentence credits, and imposed fines and fees.
There are no meritorious issues to be argued.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
________________________
RIVERA, J.
We concur:
___________________________
RUVOLO, P.J.
___________________________
REARDON, J.
Publication Courtesy of California free legal resources.
Analysis and review provided by Spring Valley Property line attorney.
San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com
