Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. YA076811 James R. Brandlin, Judge.
Thomas K. Macomber, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
ZELON, J.
Responding to a report of street fighting, police found approximately 15 men congregating outside a residence. Upon seeing the officers, three of the men ran inside the residence, closing the door on Christopher Devell Perry, before he could gain entry. Perry removed a black object from his waistband, dropped it into a nearby planter and then returned to the group of men gathered outside the residence. Officers recovered a loaded nine-millimeter handgun from the planter and arrested Perry.
Perry was charged by information with one count of possession of a firearm by a felon (Pen. Code, § 12021, subd. (a)(1)) and with a special allegation he had suffered a prior serious or violent felony conviction for robbery within the meaning of the “Three Strikes” law (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)). Perry pleaded not guilty to the charge and denied the prior strike allegation.
Statutory references are to the Penal Code.
On the People’s motion, the trial court dismissed for insufficient evidence a special allegation that Perry had served a separate prison term for a felony (§ 667.5, subd. (b)).
Perry filed a motion for discovery under Evidence Code sections 1043 and 1045 and Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531. The trial court conducted an in camera hearing after it determined Perry had demonstrated good cause to discover information in one of the arresting officer’s personnel and administrative records pertaining to “lying and fabrication.” The trial court found none of the incidents reviewed was relevant to Perry’s case and, therefore, disclosure of material from the officer’s personnel files was not appropriate. (See People v. Mooc (2001) 26 Cal.4th 1216, 1219.)
A jury convicted Perry as charged and found true the prior strike allegation. At sentencing, the trial court heard and denied Perry’s motion to strike his prior conviction (§ 1385, subd. (a); People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497, 529-530). Perry was sentenced to an aggregate state prison term of four years, or double the two-year middle term under the Three Strikes law. The trial court ordered Perry to pay a $30 security fee, a $30 criminal assessment fine and a $200 restitution fine, and imposed and suspended a parole revocation fine pursuant to section 1202.45. The court awarded Perry 327 days of presentence credit (215 actual days and 112 days of conduct credit).
Perry timely filed a notice of appeal. We appointed counsel to represent him on appeal. After examination of the record counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised. On December 1, 2010, we advised Perry that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.
We have examined the entire record, including the sealed transcript of the in camera proceedings, and are satisfied Perry’s attorney has fully complied with the responsibilities of counsel and no arguable issues exist. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284 [120 S.Ct. 746, 145 L.Ed.2d 756]; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
While the trial court failed to inquire specifically as to whether the custodian had produced all potentially responsive documents, it appears the custodian complied fully with the discovery request in light of the court’s description in the sealed transcript of the documents produced. We conclude the trial court appropriately exercised its discretion in ruling there was no material to be disclosed. (See Mooc, supra, 26 Cal.4th at p. 1229.)
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: PERLUSS, P. J. JACKSON, J.