P. v. Behag
Filed 12/21/09 P. v. Behag CA1/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LYLE FRANCES BEHAG, Defendant and Appellant. | A124564 (Lake County Super. Ct. No. CR914659) |
Lyle Frances Behag appeals following his no contest plea to unlawful cultivation of marijuana. Counsel has briefed no issues and asks for our review of the record of the proceedings. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Behag has not filed a supplemental brief. We have reviewed the record and affirm.
DISCUSSION
According to the probation report, Lake County sheriffs deputies conducted a probation search of Behags residence and found more than 400 growing marijuana plants, along with drying and processed marijuana that weighed more than seven pounds. The deputies also found a digital scale and a calendar with growing instructions. An information charged Behag with possession of marijuana for sale and unlawful cultivation of marijuana. Behag entered a no contest plea to unlawful cultivation of marijuana, and the remaining charge was dismissed. Behag was sentenced to serve the mid-term of two years in prison and to pay fines and fees as provided by statute.[1] Behag was also ordered to serve a 90-day concurrent term for misdemeanor possession of marijuana in the case for which he was on probation at the time of the current offense. He received 597 days of custody credits. He timely appealed.
Behag was represented by counsel at all stages of the proceedings, and was advised of his rights and the consequences of his plea. There was no error in the sentence imposed. Appellate counsel advised Behag of his right to file a supplemental brief in this court within 30 days of counsels opening brief, but no supplemental brief has been filed. Full review of the record reveals no issue that requires further briefing.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
_________________________
Siggins, J.
We concur:
_________________________
Pollak, Acting P.J.
_________________________
Jenkins, J.
Publication courtesy of California pro bono legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by La Mesa Property line attorney.
San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com
[1] Behag was ordered to pay a $400 restitution fine under Penal Code section 1202.4, a $400 parole revocation restitution fine under Penal Code section 1202.45 that was suspended unless his parole is revoked, a $190 lab fee under Health and Safety Code section 11372.5, a $570 drug program fee under Health and Safety Code section 11372.7, a $30 fine under Government Code section 70373, and a $20 court security fee under Penal Code section 1465.8.
