People v. Castro

Full title: THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LUIS ALBERTO CASTRO, Defendant…

Court: California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division

Date published: Oct 31, 2007

No. E043275 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 31, 2007)

Opinion

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LUIS ALBERTO CASTRO, Defendant and Appellant. E043275 California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Second Division October 31, 2007

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County Super. Ct. No. SWF016030. Rodney L. Walker, Judge.

Randall B. Bookout, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

OPINION

RICHLI, J.

On February 28, 2007, defendant, represented by counsel, pleaded guilty to one count of possession of a controlled substance, to wit, methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) (count 1); one count of being under the influence of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11550, subd. (a)) (count 2); and one count of falsely identifying himself to a police officer (Pen. Code, § 148.9, subd. (a)) (count 3). In addition, he admitted that he had sustained one prior strike conviction (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (c), (e)(1), 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)) and two prior prison terms (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). In return, defendant was promised a sentence of no more than 44 months in state prison.

On April 6, 2007, following a sentencing hearing, defendant was sentenced to the full 44 months in state prison as follows: the low term of 16 months on count 1 doubled to 32 months due to the prior strike allegation, plus one year for one of the prior prison term enhancement; the remaining prior prison term was stricken and one-year terms for counts 2 and 3 were ordered to be served concurrently to count 1.

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 [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 this court to undertake a review of the entire record.

We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, and he has not done so.

We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: RAMIREZ, P.J., McKINSTER, J.