Opinion
G037470
5-31-2007
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DAVID MORAGA, Defendant and Appellant.
Gregory Marshall, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
We appointed counsel to represent defendant David Moraga on appeal. Counsel filed a brief setting forth a statement of the case. Counsel did not argue against his client, but advised the court he found no issues to argue on his behalf. We provided defendant 30 days to file written argument in his own behalf. That period has passed, and we have received no communication from him.
We have examined the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. An information charged Moraga with attempting to possess cocaine on August 17, 2005. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a); Pen. Code, § 664.) It also alleged he had previously suffered three prior serious/violent felony convictions under the Three Strikes law (Pen. Code, § 667, subds. (d), (e)(2)(A); § 1170.12, subds. (b), (c)(2)(A)), and several prison priors under Penal Code section 667.5. The evidence at the jury trial conducted in May 2006, disclosed that on the afternoon of August 17, 2005, Moraga approached undercover Santa Ana police officers working in a high narcotics location. An officer asked defendant what he wanted or needed, and he replied "rock," which was street slang for rock cocaine. Defendant returned later with an associate named Jackett. Defendant obtained $10 from Jackett and gave it to the officer, who supplied him with a baggie containing a macadamia nut, which appears similar to rock cocaine. Defendant gave the baggie to Jackett, and then asked for some of his own for the referral. The officer declined.
The jury convicted defendant of the charged count. The court had previously struck two of three strikes, and defendant waived trial and admitted the remaining priors. The trial court declined to strike the remaining strike conviction. It imposed and doubled the one-year midterm and struck all but one of the prison term priors for an aggregate sentence of three years. The court awarded actual custody credit of 234 days and 117 days of conduct credit. It imposed a $200 restitution fine and imposed and suspended an identical parole revocation fine.
We have found no arguable issues. The judgment is affirmed.
We concur:
SILLS, P. J.
BEDSWORTH, J. --------------- Notes: According to the probation and sentencing report, defendant was arrested on August 17, 2005, and in custody from October 16, 2005, through the date of sentencing on June 16, 2006. It appears defendant may be entitled to more custody and conduct credit than the court awarded. Our affirmance does not preclude defendant from seeking correction in the trial court. (Pen. Code, § 1237.1.)