Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. TA087017
THE COURT:Dwight Corneliou Murphy, also known as Dwight C. Murphy, appeals from the judgment entered following a jury trial that resulted in his conviction of possession of cocaine base for sale. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5.) The trial court found that appellant suffered one prior felony conviction within the meaning of Penal Code section 1170.12, subdivisions (a) through (d) and Penal Code section 667, subdivisions (b) through (i), and five prior prison terms within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b).
Appellant’s conviction was based on the following facts. On October 11, 2006, at 8:00 p.m., three plainclothes narcotics officers in an unmarked van across the street from a liquor store observed appellant in front of the store. They observed him interact with four other people. Each person engaged appellant in conversation and handed him what appeared to be currency. Appellant then reached into his right jacket pocket, pulled out a plastic bag of some sort, removed a bindle from it and gave it to the person who then left.
After the fourth such encounter, the officers arrested appellant and the other person. Nine individually wrapped off-white solids, later determined to be 2.81 grams of cocaine, and $106 in various denominations were recovered from appellant. No smoking paraphernalia was recovered from him.
The trial court sentenced appellant to an aggregate prison term of 12 years, consisting of the upper term of five years, doubled as a second strike, plus an additional year for each of the two prior prison terms.
We appointed counsel to represent appellant on this appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an “Opening Brief” in which no issues were raised.
On October 1, 2007, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellant’s attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
The judgment is affirmed.