Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Superior Court County No. BA341728, of Los Angeles, Leslie A. Swain, Judge
Carol S. Boyk, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
GILBERT, P.J.
Bernard Everett appeals a judgment following conviction of possession of cocaine base for sale. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5.)
The prosecutor charged Everett with possession of cocaine base for sale and alleged a prior serious felony conviction, seven prior prison term enhancements, and a prior narcotics conviction. (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d), 667.5, subd. (b); Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.2, subd. (a).) At trial, the prosecutor presented evidence that undercover police officers observed Everett sell narcotics in an area known for narcotics sales. Everett ran from police officers and threw an article on the ground as he ran. A police officer retrieved the article that was later established to be cocaine base. Upon his arrest, police officers found currency and additional cocaine base in his clothing.
Following his conviction by jury, Everett admitted the sentence enhancements and strike allegation, except for one prior prison term allegation. The trial court struck the prior serious felony strike allegation due to its nature and age (20 years). It also struck the enhancement allegations except for the prior narcotics conviction and one prior prison term allegation. The court then sentenced Everett to nine years in prison, consisting of an upper term of five years, plus four years for the prior narcotics conviction and the prior prison term. In selecting the upper term, the court reasoned in part that Everett was on parole at the time of the present offense and that he has suffered numerous and serious criminal convictions. The court imposed various fines and fees and awarded Everett 435 days of presentence custody credits.
We appointed counsel to represent Everett in this appeal. After counsel's examination of the record, she filed an opening brief raising no issues.
On October 5, 2009, we advised Everett that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues that he wished to raise on appeal. We have not received a response.
We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that Everett's attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: COFFEE, J., PERREN, J.