Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Madera County. Edward P. Moffat, Judge. Super. Ct. No. MCR027156B
Eleanor M. Kraft, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, and Charles A. French, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Before Vartabedian, Acting P.J., Wiseman, J., and Levy, J.
On November 30, 2006, at approximately 1:30 p.m., a Madera police officer saw Fernando Chavez reach through an open window on the passenger side of a parked car toward appellant, Jose Diaz, who was seated in the driver’s seat. Chavez saw the officer and immediately pulled his arm out of the car and began walking away. As the officer contacted Chavez, Diaz got out of the car and walked toward the officer. A second officer stayed with Chavez while the first officer contacted Diaz. The officer patted Chavez down and felt a cylindrical object. The officer retrieved the object after Diaz stated it was a methamphetamine pipe. A search of the car uncovered six baggies containing methamphetamine, three cell phones, and a notebook containing “pay [and] owe” notations.
On December 21, 2006, the district attorney filed an information charging Diaz with one count each of possession for sale of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378), possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) and possession of drug paraphernalia (Health & Saf. Code, § 11364, subd. (a)).
On May 1, 2007, Diaz pled guilty to possession for sale of methamphetamine in exchange for the dismissal of the remaining counts and a “lid” of two years.
On May 30, 2007, the court sentenced Diaz to the mitigated term of 16 months.
Diaz’s appellate counsel has filed a brief which summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Diaz has not responded to this court’s invitation to submit additional briefing.
Following independent review of the record we find that no reasonably arguable factual or legal issues exist.
The judgment is affirmed.