Opinion
D061930
12-18-2012
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SPENCER S. SHARPE, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
(Super. Ct. No. SCD238105)
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Theodore M. Weathers, Judge. Affirmed.
In December 2011 Spencer S. Sharpe pleaded guilty to possession for sale of a controlled substance in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11352, subdivision (a), and admitted an enhancement alleged under section 11370.2, subdivision (a). Sharpe agreed to a stipulated sentence of six years in county jail with "no split."
All further undesignated statutory references are to the Health and Safety Code.
In April 2012 Sharpe filed a request for a sentencing modification to a more lenient sentence, alleging that he was not fully aware when he pleaded guilty because he was "coming down from and kicking drugs such as my long history and use of alcohol & cocaine. At my age of (69 year[s] old) plus diabetes and psych evaluation coming from the streets (homelessness), I was under [a lot of] stress, emotional duress, agitation, my judgement and soundness of mind were highly effected [sic]and I did not understand all that was going on."
The court denied the request on the grounds that (1) Sharpe was properly advised of his rights before pleading guilty; and (2) he agreed in the plea agreement that he was not under the influence of drugs at that time and his judgment was not impaired. The court also noted that Sharpe received the sentence the parties stipulated to.
Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende)and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders) raising possible, but not arguable issues. We offered Sharpe the opportunity to file his own brief, but he has not responded.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The underlying facts are not relevant to this appeal. However, the factual basis for the plea was that Sharpe "unlawfully possess[ed] a controlled substance and offered to sell a controlled substance (cocaine base) and had a prior sales conviction."
DISCUSSION
As we have previously noted, appellate counsel has filed a brief indicating counsel is unable to identify any argument for reversal and asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738, the brief identifies the possible, but not arguable issues as follows:
1. Whether Sharpe may appeal the validity of the guilty plea; and
2. Whether Sharpe may challenge the agreed sentence.
We have reviewed the entire record in accordance with Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738, and have not found any reasonably arguable appellate issues. Competent counsel has represented Sharpe on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NARES, Acting P. J. WE CONCUR: O'ROURKE, J. AARON, J.