People v. Denwitty

Full title: THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DUPREE DENWITTY, Defendant and…

Court: California Court of Appeals, Fifth District

Date published: Jan 23, 2009

No. F055091 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 23, 2009)

Opinion

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DUPREE DENWITTY, Defendant and Appellant. F055091 California Court of Appeal, Fifth District January 23, 2009

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Super. Ct. No. BF120727A, Jerold L. Turner, Judge.

Julia L. Bancroft, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

THE COURT^*

* Before Vartabedian, Acting P.J., Levy, J., and Kane, J.

OPINION

On September 22, 2007, officers served a search warrant at appellant, Dupree Denwitty’s residence in Bakersfield. A search of the residence uncovered three pieces of cocaine base with a combined weight of 41.3 grams, packaging material, a digital scale, and $2,000 in cash. A search of Denwitty’s person uncovered a baggie containing six grams of cocaine base.

On October 11, 2007, the district attorney filed an information charging Denwitty with possession for sale of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5) and a prior prison term enhancement (Pen. Code, § 667.5 subd. (b)). It also alleged that he had a prior conviction within the meaning of the three strikes law (Pen. Code, § 1170.12).

On November 30, 2007, the court heard and denied Denwitty’s suppression motion.

On December 4, 2007, the court heard and denied Denwitty’s Marsden ¹ motion.

1 People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118,

On February 19, 2008, Denwitty pled no contest to possession of cocaine base and admitted the three strikes law allegations in exchange for a lid of six years.

On March 26, 2008, the court denied Denwitty’s Romero motion² and sentenced him to a six-year term, the mitigated term of three years, doubled to six years because of Denwitty’s prior strike conviction.

2 People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497.

Denwitty’s appellate counsel has filed a brief which summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Denwitty had not responded to this court’s invitation to submit additional briefing.

Following independent review of the record we find that no reasonably arguable factual or legal issues exist.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.