People v. Ferreras

Full title: THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. EDWARD JAMES FERRERAS, Defendant…

Court: COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX

Date published: Sep 26, 2018

2d Crim. No. B290377 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 26, 2018)

Opinion

2d Crim. No. B290377

09-26-2018

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. EDWARD JAMES FERRERAS, Defendant and Appellant.

Richard B. Lennon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

TANGEMAN, J.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. 2017015433)
(Ventura County)

Edward James Ferreras appeals from an order sentencing him to an eight-month term consecutive to the sentence he was serving on another case arising out of Los Angeles County (Case No. SBA YA097127-01). We affirm.

Ferreras was arrested when a Ventura police officer approached him and saw a knife sheath in his waistband under his pants. He pled guilty to carrying a concealed dirk or dagger (Pen. Code, § 21310) and was sentenced to one-third the mid-term, consecutive to a sentence he was then serving on another case. The trial court struck two prior strike convictions after Ferreras admitted those convictions.

We appointed counsel to represent Ferreras in this appeal. After counsel examined the record, he filed an opening brief that raises no arguable issues. We advised Ferreras that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. Ferreras filed a supplemental brief in which he claims that the knife was not a dirk or dagger and that it was properly sheathed and not concealed. He also claims he should not have been housed in protective custody at the jail.

We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that Ferreras's attorney fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

TANGEMAN, J. We concur:

GILBERT, P. J.

PERREN, J.

Bruce A. Young, Judge

Superior Court County of Ventura

Richard B. Lennon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.