P. v. Johnson

Filed 12/1/05 P. v. Johnson CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Sacramento)

----

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DANIEL JOHNSON, Defendant and Appellant.

C050079 (Super. Ct. No. 04F09036)

Defendant Daniel Johnson pled no contest to possessing marijuana in prison (Pen. Code, § 4573.6) and admitted he had suffered one prior serious felony conviction that qualified as a strike (Pen. Code, §§ 667, 1170.12). The court sentenced him to the low term of two years in prison, which it doubled to four years because of the strike, and ordered him to pay a $1,000 restitution fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.4) and a $1,000 parole revocation fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.45).

Defendant appeals. His certificate of probable cause was denied. We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no supplemental brief from defendant. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

SIMS , Acting P.J.

We concur:

RAYE , J.

BUTZ , J.

Courtesy of California Legal Resource Directory, a source for providers and consumers of legal resources. Because we know legal.

San Diego Lawyers are available and standing by to help you.