P. v. Walton
Filed 3/12/08 P. v. Walton CA2/7
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION SEVEN
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MICHAEL WALTON, Defendant and Appellant. | B197844 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA306125) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County,
Michael A. Tynan, Judge. Affirmed.
William D. Farber, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
____________________
Walton was arrested after police conducted a narcotics surveillance of a residence from which illegal drugs were reportedly being sold. Walton was charged by information with possession for sale of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, 11351.5) (count 1) and possession of ammunition (Pen. Code, 12316, subd. (b)(1)) (count 2). The information specially alleged Walton had suffered one prior serious or violent felony conviction (robbery) within the meaning of the Three Strikes law (Pen. Code, 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)), and he had served three separate prison terms for felonies (Pen. Code, 667.5, subd. (b)).
The trial court granted Waltons motion for discovery under Evidence Code sections 1043 and 1045 and Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531 involving the arresting officers, conducted an in camera review, and ordered the disclosure of certain Pitchess material.
Walton filed a motion to suppress evidence (Pen. Code, 1538.5). According to the evidence presented at the suppression hearing, the alley behind a residence on West 59th Place in Los Angeles was under police surveillance for narcotics activity involving Walton. He was known by the undercover officers to be currently on parole, with a different residence address, but he had been purportedly dealing drugs from the West 59th Place residence.[1]
As undercover officers watched, Walton walked down the alley and stopped to unlock the gate behind the West 59th Place residence. Walton walked through the open gate, towards the back of the residence and disappeared from the officers view. Shortly thereafter, three different men separately followed the same path taken by Walton towards the back of the residence, and out of the officers line of sight. About a minute later, each man reappeared, and walked through the open gate and down the alley.
At some point, Walton retraced his steps down the alley, entered a parked car and drove away. The officers followed. Walton stopped and got out of his car; and the officers approached and identified themselves. When asked, Walton gave them his name and said he was currently on parole. Walton was detained and searched. Officers recovered a set of keys that unlocked the gate behind the West 59th Place residence. A search of the residence yielded more than $700 in cash, live ammunition, plastic baggies, and 33 plastic bindles containing 57.80 grams of cocaine base. Officers also seized bills bearing Waltons name and the West 59th Place residence address. Officers also noticed there were surveillance cameras to monitor the outside of the residence and the alley.
Following argument by counsel, the court denied the motion to suppress evidence. Walton entered a negotiated plea of guilty to amended count 3, possession for sale of cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, 11351) and admitted the prior strike conviction for robbery and one prior prison term enhancement.
The trial court found the plea was freely and voluntarily entered, and there was a factual basis for the plea. Defense counsel joined in the plea and stipulated to a factual basis. According to the terms of the plea agreement, Walton was sentenced to five years in state prison: the two-year lower term on count three, doubled under the Three Strikes law, plus one year for the prior prison term enhancement.
Walton received presentence custody credit of 338 days (226 actual days and 112 days of conduct credit).[2] The court ordered Walton to pay a $20 security assessment and a $1,000 restitution fine. A parole revocation fine was imposed and suspended pursuant to Penal Code section 1202.45. The remaining counts and special allegations were dismissed on the Peoples motion.
Walton appealed, challenging the denial of his motion to suppress evidence. We appointed counsel to represent Walton on appeal. After examination of the record counsel filed an Opening Brief in which no issues were raised. On October 18, 2007, we advised Walton he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied Waltons attorney has fully complied with the responsibilities of counsel and no arguable issues exist. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284 [120 S.Ct. 746, 145 L.Ed.2d 756]; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
WOODS, J.
We concur:
PERLUSS, P. J.
ZELON, J.
Publication courtesy of San Diego pro bono legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Poway Property line attorney.
San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com
[1] The parties stipulated that Waltons recently retired parole agent would testify he was on parole and subject to a condition permitting the search of his residence (Pen. Code, 3067), and had failed to notify his parole agent of his change of residence.
[2] Walton has requested the trial court to recalculate his presentence credit.
