Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County Nos. RIF127757 & RIF131098, Janice M. McIntyre, Judge. (Retired judge of the Riverside Super. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.)
Laura L. Furness, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
RICHLI, J.
I
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On December 28, 2005, defendant David Warren Yost took another person’s vehicle without consent. On December 30, 2005, the Riverside County District Attorney filed a felony complaint (case No. RIF127757) charging defendant with (1) vehicle theft with a prior (Pen. Code, § 666.5, subd. (a); Veh. Code, § 10851, count 1); (2) receiving a stolen vehicle (Pen. Code, § 496d, subd. (a), count 2); (3) driving with willful disregard (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, count 3); (4) resisting an officer (Pen. Code, § 69, count 4); and (5) possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a), count 5). The complaint also alleged six prison priors. (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b).) In addition, the complaint alleged a strike prior. (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (c) & (e)(1), 1170.12, subd. (c)(1).)
On February 14, 2006, the Riverside County District Attorney filed an amended felony complaint against defendant. The complaint added gang enhancements to counts 1 and 2. (Pen. Code, § 186.22, subd. (b).) In addition, the date of the strike prior was changed.
On February 15, 2006, the trial court suspended criminal proceedings against defendant to assess defendant’s mental competence. (Pen. Code, § 1368.) The court resumed criminal proceedings on April 27, 2006, after defendant was found to be mentally competent.
On June 15, 2006, defendant was in possession of drugs or drug paraphernalia while in jail. On June 28, 2006, the Riverside County District Attorney filed another felony complaint against defendant (case No. RIF131098). The new complaint charged defendant with unauthorized possession of drugs in jail (Pen. Code, § 4573.8, count 1), six prison priors (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)), and one prior strike (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (c) & (e)(1), 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)).
On July 19, 2006, defendant pled guilty in both cases. In case No. RIF127757, defendant pled guilty to vehicle theft with a prior (count 1) and resisting an officer (count 4). In addition, defendant admitted the gang enhancement on count 1, the prior strike, and two prison priors. In exchange, the People agreed not to file any other charges related to the vehicle theft with a prior, arising before the hearing date. The trial court sentenced defendant to 12 years four months in state prison.
In case No. RIF131098, defendant pled guilty to unauthorized possession of drugs in jail (count 1) and admitted the prior strike. The trial court sentenced defendant to 16 months in state prison, to be served consecutive to the first case.
In each case, the trial court ordered defendant to pay a restitution fine of $200 and a parole revocation fine in the same amount, suspended unless parole is revoked. Additionally, defendant was ordered to pay a $20 court security fee. The remaining counts were dismissed.
On September 15, 2006, defendant filed an untimely notice of appeal. On December 11, 2006, because defendant’s notice of appeal was delayed at state prison, defendant filed a motion under In re Benoit (1973) 10 Cal.3d 72. We granted the motion on February 13, 2007, and deemed defendant’s notice of appeal timely filed.
II
ANALYSIS
After defendant appealed, and upon his request, this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record.
We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief; he has not done so.
We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
III
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: HOLLENHORST, Acting P. J. MILLER, J.