Opinion
D058821 Super. Ct. No. SCD227161
08-23-2011
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. VERONICA GOMEZ, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Margo L. Lewis, Judge. Affirmed.
A jury convicted Veronica Gomez of one count of transporting more than 28.5 grams of marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11360, subd. (a)) and one count of possessing marijuana for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11359). The trial court granted summary probation for three years and ordered Gomez to perform 30 days of public service work and 100 hours of volunteer work.
FACTS
On May 5, 2010, Chula Vista Police Detective Don Clark was conducting surveillance of a Mail Services Plus store in National City as part of his work with the Drug Enforcement Agency's Narcotic Task Force Commercial or Parcel Interdiction Team. The team investigates narcotics trafficking through parcels and boxes. At about 2:00 p.m., Clark observed a white Honda drive up to the front of the store. When the driver opened the trunk, Clark saw some containers inside the trunk. The driver entered the store and left with flat boxes. He compared the flat boxes to the containers "to make sure that they would fit" before placing them in the truck and driving away.
Clark followed the Honda to a U-Haul facility in Chula Vista and radioed for assistance from fellow officers. Officers observed the man who had been driving the Honda leaving the U-Haul store with a bag of packing peanuts, which he placed in the car before driving away. The officers followed the Honda to the Golden Tree Apartments complex in National City.
A Hispanic man left the apartment complex with one long box and one cubed box; these resembled the containers that Clark had seen in the trunk of the white Honda. The man placed the boxes in a dark colored Volkswagen. Gomez was in the driver's seat of the Volkswagen.
Gomez drove to the Mail Services Plus store in National City. Police observed a FedEx truck driving away and Gomez leaving the store. Agent Peter Stevens entered the store with his narcotics-trained dog, who alerted to a box as containing drugs.
Gomez drove from the Mail Services Plus store to a nearby CVS store. While Gomez was in the store, Clark and officer Oswaldo Rivera approached the Volkswagen and noticed a box inside. When Gomez came out of the store, Clark approached her, identified himself as a police office and asked if she had shipped some parcels. Gomez said she had shipped one parcel.
Gomez also told Clark that her friend Armando had given her $300 to ship the packages for him and she was unaware of their contents.
One of the boxes contained approximately 21pounds of marijuana and the other box contained approximately 18 pounds of marijuana. These quantities of marijuana were used or possessed for sale.
Gomez testified in her own defense and denied knowing the contents of the boxes. She also testified she had no reason to suspect that anything illegal was involved, and Armando was a long-time friend.
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief setting forth evidence in the superior court. Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks that this court review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel refers to as a possible, but not arguable issue: whether there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions for transporting marijuana and for possessing marijuana for sale.
We granted Gomez permission to file a brief on her own behalf. She has not responded.
A review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, including the possible issue referred to by appellate counsel, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issue. Competent counsel has represented Gomez on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
AARON, J. WE CONCUR:
HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.
HALLER, J.