Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County No. MF007818A, John Oglesby, Judge.
Deborah Prucha, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
Before Wiseman, Acting P.J., Levy, J., and Gomes, J.
It was alleged in an information filed April 27, 2007, that appellant Luis Romero was in possession of a weapon while confined in a penal institution (Pen. Code, § 4502), subdivision (a), and that he had suffered a “strike.” Pursuant to a plea agreement, on June 26, 2007, appellant pled no contest to a lesser offense, viz., manufacture of a weapon while confined in a penal institution (Pen. Code, § 4502, subd. (b)), and admitted the strike allegation. Immediately thereafter, appellant requested immediate sentencing and the court imposed a four-year prison term, consisting of the two-year midterm on the substantive offense, doubled pursuant to the three strikes law (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subd. (e)(1); 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)). The court ordered the term to run consecutively to the term appellant was serving at the time of the instant offense.
We use the term “strike” as a synonym for “prior felony conviction” within the meaning of the “three strikes” law (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i); 1170.12), i.e., a prior felony conviction or juvenile adjudication that subjects a defendant to the increased punishment specified in the three strikes law.
Appellant’s appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which summarizes the pertinent facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks that this court independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d. 436.) Appellant has not responded to this court’s invitation to submit additional briefing.
Correctional Officer William Herider testified to the following at appellant’s preliminary hearing. On October 14, 2006, appellant was on “contraband watch” at California Correctional Institute at Tehachapi. He “came from the bus at Wasco, and he failed the metal detector test.” At approximately 7:50 a.m., appellant indicated he had to go to the bathroom. He defecated, and the fecal matter was collected in a plastic bag. Officer Herider found in the fecal matter, a latex glove finger that had been “tied off at one end into a knot.” Inside the glove finger, the officer found a “piece of metal with … sharpened edges,” approximately three and one-quarter inches in length.
Following independent review of the record, we have concluded that no reasonably arguable legal or factual issues exist.
The judgment is affirmed.