Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Super. Ct. No. 08 5132
Butz, J.
On September 22, 2008, a law enforcement officer searched defendant Michael Klutsenbaker and found about 20 Vicodin capsules in a plastic bag. Defendant did not have the prescription with him for the Vicodin, which he claimed had been prescribed for an injury.
Defendant entered a negotiated plea of guilty to possession of hydrocodone (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)) and admitted a strike prior (Pen. Code, § 667, subds. (b)-(i)) in exchange for dismissal of the remaining counts and allegations and a stipulated 32-month state prison sentence. After denying defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea, the court sentenced defendant to state prison for 32 months, that is, the low term of 16 months, doubled for the strike prior. The court ordered defendant to pay a $200 restitution fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.4, subd. (b)), a $200 parole revocation fine, suspended pending successful completion of parole (id., § 1202.45), a $190 laboratory fee, including penalty assessments, pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 11372.5, a $570 drug program fee, including penalty assessments, pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 11372.7, a $30 court construction assessment, and a $20 court security fee (Pen. Code, § 1465.8). Defendant was awarded 242 days of presentence custody credit.
Defendant appeals. The court denied defendant’s request for a certificate of probable cause. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5.)
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) 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 have elapsed, and we have received no communication from defendant. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: HULL , Acting P. J., ROBIE , J.