Filed 5/1/07 P. v. Harris CA2/4

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Allen J. Webster, Jr., Judge. Affirmed.

David M. Thompson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Reginald Dean Harris appeals from judgment entered following his no contest plea to carrying a concealed firearm (Pen. Code,  12025, subd. (a)(2)), a misdemeanor.[1]His plea followed the denial of his motion to suppress evidence pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5 and his motion to set aside the information pursuant to Penal Code section 995. Imposition of sentence was suspended, and he was placed on summary probation for three years upon certain terms and conditions. He asserted his appeal was based on the denial of his motion to suppress evidence made pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5.

The record[2]establishes that on June 16, 2005 at approximately 6:25 p.m. during graduation ceremonies at Dominguez High School, a former teacher told Officer Victor Ayala of the Compton School police department that he had seen a man drop a gun in front of him.[3]The teacher described the handgun and the man who had dropped the gun, and stated the subject picked up the gun, put it in his waistband and walked to the bleachers. The teacher described the area where the incident took place and described the subject as wearing a white button-up shirt with pink, blue and red stripes, blue faded jeans and a red baseball cap. Several officers, including Officer Ayala, immediately went to the area to look for the suspect. Officer Sergio Reynoso and Officer Ayala approached appellant, who was the only person who matched the description, and asked him, Do you have anything on you that you shouldnt have? Appellant then pointed toward his waistband. Officer Reynoso then placed his right hand at appellants waistband, outside of his clothing, and felt the handgun. Officer Reynoso recovered a loaded, semi-automatic gun from appellant and placed him under arrest. The serial number of the gun was run through the automated firearms system, and there were no records indicating the gun had been registered.

After review of the record, appellants court-appointed counsel filed an opening brief requesting this court to independently review the record pursuant to the holding of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.

On January 3, 2007, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.

We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that no arguable issues exist, and that appellant has, by virtue of counsels compliance with the Wende procedure and our review of the record, received adequate and effective appellate review of the judgment entered against him in this case. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 278; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal. 4th 106, 112.)

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

SUZUKAWA, J.

We concur:

EPSTEIN, P.J.

WILLHITE, J.

Publication courtesy of San Diego free legal advice.

Analysis and review provided by Santee Property line attorney.

[1] He was charged in count 1 with possession of a firearm in a school zone (Pen. Code,  626.9, subd. (b)) and in count 2 of carrying a non-registered loaded firearm (Pen. Code,  12031, subd. (a)(1)). Pursuant to the negotiated plea, the information was amended to add count 3, carrying a concealed firearm (Pen. Code,  12025, subd. (a)(2)), to which appellant pled no contest, and counts 1 and 2 were dismissed. The court noted that appellant was in the Navy and had done some pretty outstanding work in the Navy.

[2] The evidence is taken from the preliminary hearing at which the motion to suppress evidence was made and from an additional hearing conducted pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5, subdivision (i).

[3] Officer Ayala knew the former teacher for approximately two or three years but did not know his name; the teacher had worked at the school for a couple of years and then left; he also substituted at other schools in the district.