People v. Hageman

Full title: THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SEAN DION HAGEMAN, Defendant and…

Court: California Court of Appeals, Third District, Sacramento

Date published: Dec 14, 2009

No. C060625 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 14, 2009)

Opinion

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SEAN DION HAGEMAN, Defendant and Appellant. C060625 California Court of Appeal, Third District, Sacramento December 14, 2009

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Super. Ct. No. 07F11334.

HULL, Acting P. J.

After commencing trial on charges of possession of cocaine base for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5) and transportation for sale of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (a)), defendant Sean Dion Hageman pleaded no contest to the charges, as well as admitting a prior strike conviction (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12), four prior prison terms (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)) and a prior conviction for possession for sale of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, §§ 11370.2, subd. (a), 11351.5). In exchange for defendant’s plea, the trial court agreed to sentence him to 10 years in state prison. Defendant was sentenced accordingly.

The charges stemmed from an incident in which defendant was detained, while he was a passenger in a truck, for violating a provision of the Vehicle Code while riding a bicycle a short time earlier. Defendant was arrested for a parole violation, and a baggie containing 4.56 grams of cocaine was located in between his buttocks during a search at the jail.

Defendant had prior convictions for assault with a firearm (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(2)) and possession for sale of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.2, subd. (a)), and he had served prior prison terms for separate felony convictions in 1991, 1993, 1998, and 2002.

Defendant appealed.

We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and, pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, requesting the court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant.

We have undertaken an independent examination of the entire record in this matter and found no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: ROBIE, J., BUTZ, J.