From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Young

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
Nov 4, 2008
No. D052812 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 4, 2008)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DUANE LAMAR YOUNG, Defendant and Appellant. D052812 California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, First Division November 4, 2008

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Melinda J. Lasater, Judge, Super. Ct. No. SCD208425

IRION, J.

A jury convicted Duane Lamar Young of one count of selling cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (a)) and one count of possession of cocaine base with the intent to sell (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5). In a separate proceeding, Young admitted he had suffered two prior drug sale convictions within the meaning of Health and Safety Code section 11370.2, subdivision (a). The trial court sentenced Young to seven years in prison.

FACTS

On August 15, 2007, San Diego Police Officer Francis Bradley, working undercover, was part of a drug buy/bust operation in the 800 block of Broadway in downtown San Diego. Bradley approached codefendant Mark Gilmore and said he wanted to buy $20 worth of cocaine base. Gilmore said he knew a seller and called this individual on his cell phone. During the phone conversation, Bradley increased the buy to $30 worth of cocaine base. Gilmore arranged to meet the drug seller at the picnic benches at Civic Center Plaza. As Gilmore and Bradley walked to the plaza, Gilmore asked if he could get some money for facilitating the deal and if he could smoke some of the cocaine base. Bradley agreed to the requests.

At the plaza, there were three cement tables; Young was at one of the tables along with three other males. Gilmore approached Young, sat down and had a short conversation. Gilmore walked back to Bradley and asked for the money. Bradley gave Gilmore a prerecorded $20 bill and a prerecorded $10 bill. Gilmore returned to the table and spoke to Young again. Gilmore walked back to Bradley and gave him "two off-white rock substances." The substances contained 0.15 grams of cocaine base.

After Gilmore and Bradley started to walk away, two uniformed officers arrested Gilmore. Young was arrested after Bradley gave the signal to other officers to him.

Police searched Young and found the prerecorded bills plus nine $1 bills. Among other things, police impounded five cell phones, two walkie-talkies and a cell phone charger.

An officer who searched Gilmore found his cell phone and called the last number on list of prior calls; one of Young's cell phones began to ring.

DISCUSSION

Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief setting forth evidence in the superior court. Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks that this court review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel refers to as possible, but not arguable, issues: (1) whether Young's convictions were supported by sufficient evidence; (2) whether the record contains evidence of ineffective assistance of counsel; (3) whether the court's refusal to give CALCRIM No. 373 was error; (4) whether the court erred by denying the defense's mistrial motion after the prosecutor impeached a defense witness with a felony conviction for sale of drugs; and (5) whether improper jury instructions were given.

We granted Young permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not responded.

A review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, including the possible issues referred to by appellate counsel, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issues. Competent counsel has represented Young on this appeal.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

WE CONCUR: HUFFMAN, Acting P. J., McDONALD, J.


Summaries of

People v. Young

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
Nov 4, 2008
No. D052812 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 4, 2008)
Case details for

People v. Young

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DUANE LAMAR YOUNG, Defendant and…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division

Date published: Nov 4, 2008

Citations

No. D052812 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 4, 2008)