Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Brian S. McCarville, Judge, Super.Ct.No. FSB058701
James M. Crawford, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
Gaut, J.
Defendant appeals following a guilty plea and a deferred entry of judgment, based upon a conviction of one count of possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)), challenging the denial of the motion to suppress evidence (Pen. Code, § 1538.5) made and denied at the preliminary hearing.
BACKGROUND
A felony complaint was filed on October 23, 2006, charging defendant with a possession of methamphetamine. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a).) At the preliminary hearing, defendant made a motion to suppress evidence (Pen. Code, § 1538.5), which was denied by the magistrate. Defendant was held to answer on the charge.
An information was then filed, charging defendant with the same violation. On July 3, 2007, defendant entered into a plea agreement in which he pled guilty to the charge of possession of methamphetamine. In return for his plea, and based on the probation officer’s recommendation, entry of judgment was deferred and defendant was placed on a drug diversion program. Defendant appeals, challenging the denial of the suppression motion.
DISCUSSION
At his request, this court appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. 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 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493], setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues, and requesting that we undertake an independent review of the entire record. We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, but he has not done so.
Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have conducted an independent review of the record, including the grounds asserted in the notice of appeal relating to the denial of the motion to suppress evidence, which was made and denied at the preliminary hearing. We dismiss the appeal.
First, a deferred entry of judgment is not a final, appealable judgment. (People v. Mazurette (2001) 24 Cal.4th 789, 794.) Denial of a suppression motion may be appealed following a guilty plea, but only upon the entry of a final judgment. (Id. at pp. 793-794.) Second, an order denying a suppression motion made prior to or during a preliminary hearing is not appealable unless it has been renewed in the superior court following arraignment on the information. (People v. Lilienthal (1978) 22 Cal.3d 891, 896-897.) A preliminary hearing is conducted by a magistrate who does not sit as a superior court judge. (People v. Richardson (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 574, 584.)
We have completed our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues arising from any appealable judgment or order.
DISPOSITION
The appeal is dismissed.
We concur: McKinster, Acting P. J., King, J.