P. v. Landers CA2/4

Filed 7/30/13 P. v. Landers CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR THE PEOPLE, B243258 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. VA123792) v. ANDRE LANDERS, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Marcelita V. Haynes, Judge. Affirmed. Maria Morrison, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. ____________________________________ On February 23, 2012, appellant was arrested on two outstanding warrants. During the subsequent booking search, the police recovered a small baggie containing cocaine base from inside appellant’s cell phone cover. Appellant was charged with one count of possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)). It was further alleged that he had suffered a prior “strike” conviction (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)), and seven prior convictions within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b). On March 8, 2012, appellant waived his constitutional rights, pled no contest to the charged count, and admitted the prior convictions. Pursuant to an agreement with the trial court, appellant was released to a drug treatment program, where he was to remain for one year. If he successfully completed the program, the court agreed it would dismiss the strike and grant probation. Appellant failed to complete the program. On August 9, 2012, the trial court imposed a 32-month prison sentence, consisting of the low term of 16 months, doubled for the prior strike. The court dismissed the other priors. The court imposed certain fees and fines, and awarded appellant 182 days of presentence custody credits. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. After examining the record, appointed appellate counsel filed a brief raising no issues, but asking this court to independently review the record on appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441-442. (See Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 264.) On March 15, 2013, we advised appellant he had 30 days within which to submit by brief or letter any contentions or argument he wished this court to consider. No response was received. This court has examined the entire record in accordance with People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at pages 441-442, and is satisfied appellant’s attorney has 2 fully complied with the responsibilities of counsel, and no arguable issues exist. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of conviction. DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS. MANELLA, J. We concur: EPSTEIN, P. J. WILLHITE, J. 3