Opinion
A102981.
10-29-2003
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DAVID WAYNE TAYLOR, Defendant and Appellant.
David Taylor appeals from a judgment of conviction entered upon a plea of nolo contendere. Appellants court-appointed counsel has briefed no issues and asks this court to review the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.
A consolidated information filed in Solano County Superior Court charged appellant with two counts of possession of base cocaine for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5),[] two counts of the transportation of cocaine (§ 11352), and possession of cocaine for sale (§ 11351). The information further alleged that appellant suffered a prior strike (Pen. Code, § 1170.12) and two prior convictions for a drug-related felony, each a sentencing enhancement (§ 11370.2).
In a negotiated disposition, appellant pleaded nolo contendere to one count of possession of cocaine base for sale (§ 11351.5), admitted the alleged strike (Pen. Code, § 1170.12), and admitted suffering two prior convictions for a drug-related felony (§ 11370.2) with the understanding that the court would sentence him to twelve years in state prison. The court then granted the prosecutions motion to dismiss the remainder of the information.
The court sentenced appellant to the mitigated term of three years in state prison for possession of cocaine base for sale (& sect; 11351.5) and then doubled the term to six years because of appellants admitted strike (Pen. Code, § 1170.12). The court then enhanced the term by three years for each of two admitted prior convictions for a drug-related felony (§ 11370.2). Thus, the aggregate term totaled the agreed 12 years in state prison. The court ordered appellant to pay a $2,000 restitution fine and ultimately granted him 343 days total presentence credit.
Before appellant entered his plea, the court advised him of the constitutional rights he would be waiving and the direct consequences of his plea. Appellant expressly waived his constitutional rights and knowingly and voluntarily pleaded nolo contendere and admitted the special allegations.
Appellant was represented by counsel throughout the proceedings.
There was no sentencing error.
There are no issues that require further briefing.
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: Parrilli, J. and Pollak, J. --------------- Notes: All statutory references are to the Health and Safety Code unless otherwise indicated.