Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County No. RIF152780. Barbara J. Beck, Judge. (Retired judge of the Santa Barbara Super. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.)
Harry Zimmerman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
HOLLENHORST Acting P.J.
Defendant and appellant Roderick Congious was charged with possession of marijuana while he was an inmate at the California Rehabilitation Center. (Pen. Code, § 4573.8, count 1.) It was also alleged that he had served two prior prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (b)) and had three prior strike convictions (§§ 667, subd. (c), (e)(2)(A), 1170.12, subd. (c)(2)(A)). Defendant pled not guilty and denied all of the prior conviction allegations. He filed a Pitchess motion. The trial court conducted an in camera review of the relevant documents and concluded that there was no discoverable evidence requested by the defense. Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant then pled guilty to count 1 and admitted the first alleged prior strike conviction, a carjacking. (§ 215.) The trial court dismissed the second and third prior strike convictions, pursuant to People v. Superior Court (Romero)(1996) 13 Cal.4th 497. The trial court also found that the two prison priors had “timed out” and struck them from the information. The trial court sentenced defendant, as agreed upon, to the upper term of three years in state prison on count 1, doubled pursuant to the strike conviction, for a total of six years in state prison. The trial court also awarded 42 days of presentence custody credits (28 actual days and 14 days of § 4019 credits).
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531.
Defendant filed a notice of appeal, indicating he wished to challenge the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea. We affirm.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Defendant was charged with and admitted that, on or about October 3, 2008, he willfully, knowingly, and unlawfully possessed marijuana while he was an inmate at the California Rehabilitation Center. (§ 4573.8.)
DISCUSSION
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 and two potential arguable issues: 1) whether defendant could appeal the trial court’s determination, following the Pitchess motion hearing, that the confidential records contained no discoverable information; and 2) whether defendant could challenge the trial court’s imposition of the upper term on count 1. Counsel has also requested that this court review 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.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: McKINSTER J., KING J.