P. v. Hills
Filed 6/2/08 P. v. Hills CA4/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MELVIN HILLS, Defendant and Appellant. | D051751 (Super. Ct. Nos. SCD202123 & SCD204653 |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, David J. Danielsen, Judge. Affirmed.
In superior court case No. SCD202123, Melvin Hills entered a negotiated guilty plea to selling cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, 11352, subd. (a)) and admitted he had a prior narcotics conviction within the meaning of Health & Safety Code section 11370.2, subdivision (a). Under the plea bargain, in which the prosecution agreed to dismiss the balance of the information, the parties stipulated to a prison term of six years.
In superior court case No. SCD204653, Hills entered a negotiated guilty plea to possessing cocaine for sale (Health & Saf. Code, 11351.5) in exchange for a stipulated term of 16 months, consecutive to the sentence in case No. SCD202123.
On August 13, 2007, the court sentenced Hills to a six-year prison term in case No. SCD202123, which consisted of the low term of three years for selling cocaine and a three-year enhancement for the prior narcotics conviction. The court awarded Hills a total of 288 days of custody credits. Also on August 13, the court sentenced Hills to a consecutive 16-month prison term in case No. SCD204653. The court awarded Hills a total of seven days of custody credits.
The court denied Hills's requests for a certificate of probable cause in each of these cases.
FACTS
On October 11, 2006, Hills sold $20 worth of cocaine to an undercover police officer.
On February 8, 2007, police arrested Hills's girlfriend for selling cocaine to an undercover officer. Police obtained a warrant to search the girlfriend's residence, where they found Hills, cocaine and manufacturing paraphernalia.
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief setting forth evidence in the superior court. Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks that this court review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel refers to as a possible, but not arguable, issue: whether Hills's presentence custody credits for the two cases were correctly calculated.
We granted Hills permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not responded.
A review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, including the possible issue referred to by appellate counsel, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issues. Competent counsel has represented Hills on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
IRION, J.
WE CONCUR:
BENKE, Acting P. J.
McDONALD, J.
Publication courtesy of California pro bono legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by La Mesa Property line attorney.
