Opinion
B163515.
7-7-2003
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. GINO PATRICK MAGAZINO, Defendant and Appellant.
California Appellate Project, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, Jonathan B. Steiner, Executive Director and Richard B. Lennon, Staff Attorney, for Appellant. No appearance for Respondent.
Gino Patrick Magazino appeals from an order revoking probation and sentencing him to an aggregate term of six years four months state prison in four cases.
In Case No. 1013250 appellant entered a plea of no contest to possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)), battery (Pen. Code, § 243, subd. (e)), and driving under the influence of alcohol (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a)). The trial court suspended imposition of sentence on August 17, 2000, and granted probation with jail terms.
On November 30, 2000, appellant admitted violating probation in Case No. 1013250 and entered into a negotiated plea to the following charges in three other cases:
In Case No. 1014953 to possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)), being under the influence of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11550, subd. (a)), and destroying evidence (Pen. Code, § 135).
In Case No. 1015016 to possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)), being under the influence of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11550, subd. (a)), and an out on-bail/own recognizance enhancement (Pen. Code, § 12022.1).
In Case No. 1015158 to possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)) and battery (Pen. Code, § 143 , subd. (e)(1)).
The trial court imposed a sentence of six years four months in the three latter cases (Case Nos. 1014953, 1015016, and 1015158) and a three year concurrent sentence in the first case (Case No. 1013250), stayed execution of the sentences, and granted probation subject to the condition that appellant serve jail and enroll in a residential drug treatment program.
In July 2002, appellant admitted violating probation in all four cases. The trial court ordered appellant to serve the six year four month aggregate sentence and ordered appellant to pay restitution and fines in each case.
We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised.
On June 17, 2003, we advised appellant that he had 30 days in which to personally submit any contentions that he wished to raise on appeal. On June 20, 2003, we received a response from appellant contending, among other things, that the trial court abused its discretion in not imposing a lesser sentence to treat his substance abuse problem.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellants appointed counsel has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441, 158 Cal. Rptr. 839, 600 P.2d 1071.)
The judgments are affirmed.
We concur: GILBERT, P.J., and COFFEE, J.