Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County No. 09CF2089, Dan McNerney, Judge.
Ron Boyer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
O’LEARY, ACTING P.J.
We appointed counsel to represent Cresensiano Ochoa Carbajal on appeal. Counsel filed a brief that set forth the facts of the case. Counsel did not argue against his client, but advised the court no issues were found to argue on his behalf. Carbajal was given 30 days to file written argument on his own behalf. That period has passed, and we have received no communication from him.
Counsel did not set forth any facts or provide the court with information as to issues that might arguably support an appeal to assist the court with its independent review pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738. We have independently examined the record and found no arguable issues. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We affirm the judgment.
FACTS
Sergeant Derek Cook and another officer were in an unmarked car, when they observed a car doubled parked. The car’s interior lights were on, and the officers observed three males in the car. As the officers drove by, all three males snapped their heads around and looked at the officers. The officers made a U-turn, and the car pulled away. The car pulled into the driveway of a condominium building.
Cook approached the car and observed the three males leaning over at the waist. At gun point, Cook ordered all three men to put their hands up. The three males did not initially comply, but after being told three more times they put their hands up. While waiting for additional officers to arrive, Cook observed a 24-ounce blue Budweiser beer can sitting on the center console. Cook asked Carbajal, who was in the driver’s seat, to hand him the can. Carbajal handed Cook the can, and Cook then observed a small clear piece of plastic containing crystals.
While waiting for additional officers to arrive, Cook observed Carbajal to be extremely nervous. His lip was quivering, and his hands were shaking. When additional officers arrived, officers asked the three males to get out of the car. A search of the car revealed another clear piece of plastic containing crystals, and four cellular telephones. The contents of the two pieces of plastic were later weighed. The first contained 2.0 grams and the second 2.6 grams. The crystal in both bags was determined to be methamphetamine.
When Carbajal was arrested, he had $183 on his person. When he was later interviewed, he admitted one of the two pieces of plastic containing crystals was his. At trial, Carbajal testified he had purchased the methamphetamine for personal use.
An information charged Carbajal with the sale or transportation of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379, subd. (a)) (count1) and possession of methamphetamine for the purpose of sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378) (count 2). The information alleged Carbajal had suffered a prior conviction for violation of Health and Safety Code section 11351 (Pen. Code, § 1203.07, subd. (a) (11); Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.2, subd. (c)). The information also alleged he served a prior prison term (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). Carbajal waived his right to a jury trial on the prior conviction.
A jury convicted Carbajal of count 1 but acquitted him of count 2. The jury convicted Carbajal of the lesser included offense of count 2, possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)). The court found the prior conviction allegation true.
The trial court denied probation and sentenced Carbajal to two years in prison on count 1, plus three years for the prior conviction, and stayed the sentence on count 2 pursuant to Penal Code section 654. The court struck the punishment on the prior conviction allegation. Carbajal filed a timely notice of appeal.
DISCUSSION
We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that Carbajal’s attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
WE CONCUR: ARONSON, J., IKOLA, J.