From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Young

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
Jun 11, 2012
F063180 (Cal. Ct. App. Jun. 11, 2012)

Opinion

F063180

06-11-2012

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MARC DEANDRE YOUNG, Defendant and Appellant.

Richard L. Fitzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. BF136675A)


OPINION


THE COURT

Before Wiseman, Acting P.J., Gomes, J. and Detjen, J.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Michael G. Bush, Judge.

Richard L. Fitzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Appellant, Marc Deandre Young, pled no contest to transportation of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379, subd. (a)) and admitted allegations that he had a prior conviction within the meaning of the three strikes law (Pen. Code, § 667, subds. (b)-(i)). Following independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), we affirm.

All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
--------

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On April 30, 2011, after receiving a broadcast about a suspicious subject, later identified as Young, Bakersfield Police Officer Matt Gregory saw Young walking in an apartment complex. When they made eye contact, Young ran away. Gregory and other officers then entered the complex to look for Young. One of the officers spotted Young and ordered him to stop but Young kept on running. Young forced his way into an apartment and unsuccessfully attempted to shut the door behind him. Officers entered the apartment and took Young into custody after seeing him walk out of a bedroom. The tenant of the apartment allowed the officers to search the bedroom that Young had been in. On a shelf in the room an officer found a plastic baggie containing .5 grams of methamphetamine.

On May 26, 2011, the district attorney filed an information charging Young with transportation of methamphetamine (count 1), possession of methamphetamine (count 2/Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)), trespass of a residence (count 3/§ 602.5), resisting arrest (§ 148, subd. (a)(1)), and destruction or concealment of evidence (count 5/§ 135). Counts 1 and 2 also charged Young with four prior prison term enhancements and with having a prior conviction within the meaning of the three strikes law. Count 1 also charged Young with a prior conviction enhancement (Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.2, subd. (c)).

On July 1, 2011, Young pled no contest to transportation of methamphetamine and admitted the prior strike allegations in exchange for the dismissal of the remaining counts and enhancements and a stipulated prison term of four years.

On August 24, 2011, the court sentenced Young, pursuant to his plea agreement, to a four-year term, the middle term of two years on his transportation of methamphetamine conviction, doubled to four years because of Young's prior strike conviction.

Young's appellate counsel has filed a brief which summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Additionally, although Young responded to this court's invitation to submit additional briefing with a letter that was filed on December 29, 2011, his letter does not raise any arguments.

Following an independent review of the record we find that no reasonably arguable factual or legal issues exist.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Young

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
Jun 11, 2012
F063180 (Cal. Ct. App. Jun. 11, 2012)
Case details for

People v. Young

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MARC DEANDRE YOUNG, Defendant and…

Court:COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

Date published: Jun 11, 2012

Citations

F063180 (Cal. Ct. App. Jun. 11, 2012)