Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County No. RIF134066, Eric G. Helgesen, Judge. (Retired judge of the Tulare Super. Ct., assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.)
James R. Bostwick, Jr., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
McKinster, Acting P.J.
I
INTRODUCTION
On April 3, 2008, defendant and appellant Richard Ward Stormer was charged in an amended information with possession of methamphetamine for purpose of sale under Health and Safety Code section 11378 (count 1), and possession of heroin under Health and Safety Code section 11350, subdivision (a) (count 2). The information also alleged that defendant had five prior serious felony convictions under Penal Code sections 667, subdivisions (c) and (e), and 1170.12, subdivision (c).
A jury found defendant guilty on count 2, but was unable to agree on a verdict on count 1. The jury found true the allegations that defendant had been convicted of five serious felonies. The trial court declared a mistrial as to count 1, and subsequently granted the prosecutor’s motion to dismiss the charge.
On November 21, 2008, the trial court struck four of the five prior conviction allegations. The court then sentenced defendant to six years in state prison (upper term doubled). Defendant appeals.
II
STATEMENT OF FACTS
On January 3, 2007, officers from the Riverside Police Department executed a search warrant at 2490 Mission Inn Avenue, Riverside. Two houses were at this address. The main house in front was boarded up and unoccupied; behind the main house was a garage that had been converted for occupancy. The officers knocked at the smaller house and announced their presence. No one responded. The officers forced the door open with a battering ram. Officer Ronald Kipp, who obtained the search warrant, was in charge of the investigation.
The search focused on the office and kitchen areas of the house. A fake shaving cream called a hide-a-can was found in the office. The false bottom contained three plastic baggies which contained about eight grams of a substance containing methamphetamine. In a receptacle in the kitchen mixed in with the trash, the officers found three grams of methamphetamine in two plastic baggies, and three grams of tar heroin in another plastic baggie. A digital scale was also found in the trash. The officer conducting the search turned everything they found over to Officer Kipp; these items included the drugs, scales, empty baggies and syringes. A Harley-Davidson motorcycle was parked in the living room. Paperwork which reflected defendant’s ownership of the motorcycle and a truck were found.
While the officers were conducting the search, a Chevrolet Blazer drove into the driveway. Nicholas White, the driver, and defendant, the front passenger, were detained; the vehicle was searched. Two glass pipes used for smoking methamphetamine and a small digital scale were found in the center console of the car. The residue in one of the pipes was tested with a field test kit and found to contain methamphetamine.
Officer Kipp recovered $700 in 5, 10, and 20 dollar bills, and the keys to the house from defendant. Officer Kipp interviewed defendant at the scene. Defendant claimed ownership of all of the items found in the house, including the heroin, methamphetamine, scales, and packaging. Defendant told the officer that he used about one gram of heroin a day and methamphetamine to support his heroin addiction. Officer Kipp, who personally knew White, testified that White was living with his father in Woodcrest, and not in the residence searched. Officer Kipp also testified that defendant’s girlfriend, Raven, sometimes stayed at the residence, and the officers released the house to her when they left so that she could lock it up. The officer opined that defendant had been selling methamphetamine, and that the quantities of methamphetamine and heroin that were seized were usable.
A forensic technician from the district attorney’s office testified that a Penal Code section 969b packet from the state prison system reflected that defendant had suffered five robbery convictions from 1989 to 1990.
White, the driver of the Blazer, testified. He stated that he and defendant were friends. On January 3, 2007, White picked defendant up at the address on Mission Inn Avenue and they went somewhere to eat. White admitted that he has used controlled substances, primarily methamphetamine. On January 3, he and defendant probably smoked some methamphetamine together. White believed that defendant was also using heroin at the time.
When White and defendant returned to the Mission Inn Avenue residence, they were both handcuffed and sat on the porch. White stated that he had been at the residence two or three times prior to the night of his arrest. White, however, did not know who owned the residence or who was living there. White understood that defendant was doing renovating work on the properly. White described the residence as a spot where everybody came to do drugs and where homeless people hung out. White testified that defendant did not try to sell drugs to White.
Defendant testified that he started using drugs in the late 1970’s. In 1989, he committed five robberies using a knife. He was released from prison in 1994, and between 1994 and 2007, he ran a carpet and tile business in Palm Springs. During that time, he attended a program for recovering addicts at the ABC Club in Indio. He relapsed in 1997, and was convicted of hit and run driving. Before his arrest in this case, he was living in his own house in Rancho Mirage and also used his mother’s address in Highgrove. He relapsed into drug use in 2006 after a friend was killed.
Defendant stated that he began to do work on the front house on Mission Inn Avenue in December of 2006, for the owner, Chuck. Defendant also worked on the owner’s house on Victoria. The rear residence was uninhabitable because it has no beds and defendant was not living there. Two crews with a total of six or seven people were working on the front house. Defendant described the rear structure as a garage with a room to the side. It had a refrigerator and some other furniture. He stored his tools and other items there. Defendant stated that Raven was a good friend, but not his girlfriend.
Defendant testified that on January 3, 2007, he was planning to move his motorcycle because it had no locks on it. White came to the residence at about 8:00 or 9:00 at night; they went to the store and got something to eat. Defendant said that he was using morning, noon and night—three grams of heroin per day. Defendant occasionally used methamphetamine and may have taken a hit with White in the driveway. When White and defendant returned to the Mission Inn address, Officer Kipp arrested him. Defendant knew that Chuck and Raven were coming to the residence so defendant told the officer that “anything in the house was mine.” When defendant made that statement, he did not know what items had been found inside the house. Defendant possessed the money found on him for the purpose of paying the work crew. Defendant denied that he was selling drugs and telling Officer Kipp that he was selling drugs. Defendant admitted that he was a drug addict.
III
ANALYSIS
After defendant appealed, and upon his request, this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record.
We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.
Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have conducted an independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
IV
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: Richli, J., King, J.