From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Moore

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division
Nov 14, 2008
No. E045752 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 14, 2008)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ROBERT DANIEL MOORE, Defendant and Appellant. E045752 California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Second Division November 14, 2008

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Mark E. Petersen, Judge. Super.Ct.No. SWF023084

Dabney B. Finch, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

OPINION

RICHLI J.

I

INTRODUCTION

Defendant and appellant Robert Daniel Moore was charged with (1) possessing methamphetamine under Health and Safety Code section 11377, subdivision (a) (count 1); (2) being under the influence of a controlled substance under Health and Safety Code section 11550, subdivision (a) (count 2); and (3) resisting a peace officer under Penal Code section 148, subdivision (a) (count 3).

After a preliminary hearing, the trial court found insufficient cause to believe defendant guilty of count 3; the court ordered defendant discharged as to that count. Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant pled guilty to count 1. The court imposed the low term of one year four months, and then suspended execution of the sentence, granting probation for 36 months. Thereafter, the court dismissed count 2 in the interest of justice.

On May 8, 2008, defendant, in propria persona, filed a notice of appeal. The notice specifies that the appeal follows a guilty plea, and is based on the denial of a motion to suppress evidence. The notice also challenges the validity of the plea. The notice additionally states that the “criminal nature of charges, unresonabl[e] search and siezure [sic]” as the “other” basis of defendant’s appeal. Defendant’s request for a certificate of probable cause was denied.

It appears from the record that no motion to suppress was filed in this case.

II

FACTS

Because defendant pled guilty, the facts are derived from the transcript of the preliminary hearing.

Two wardens from the Department of Fish and Game took defendant into custody on a dirt road in Hemet, after he refused to produce identification. One of them hit defendant with a tactical expandable baton when defendant tried to get away. The wardens searched defendant and found methamphetamine in his pocket, which, including the plastic baggie, weighed 0.03 grams.

The responding sheriff’s deputy noticed that defendant was fidgety and displayed eyelid flutter. Defendant’s pulse was 120 beats per minute. After estimating defendant’s pupils were dilated to approximately five millimeters, the deputy took defendant into custody for being under the influence of methamphetamine.

III

ANALYSIS

After defendant appealed, and upon his request, this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493] setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record.

We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.

We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.

IV

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: RAMIREZ, P. J., MILLER, J.


Summaries of

People v. Moore

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division
Nov 14, 2008
No. E045752 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 14, 2008)
Case details for

People v. Moore

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ROBERT DANIEL MOORE, Defendant…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division

Date published: Nov 14, 2008

Citations

No. E045752 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 14, 2008)