Filed 2/27/18 P. v. Overstreet 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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


THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

CHIVETTA LANEA OVERSTREET,

Defendant and Appellant.
B278094

(Los Angeles County
Super. Ct. No. BA433099)


APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Craig Richman, Judge. Affirmed.
Renée Paradis, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Respondent.



________________________________________

On January 21, 2015, Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) Officer Owen Mills observed a white Mercedes making an erratic lane change without signaling. He activated his squad car’s lights and siren, but the Mercedes did not stop. Rather, it sped up, ran two red lights and entered oncoming traffic before pulling into a Home Depot parking lot. After catching up with the vehicle, Mills discovered it had been left abandoned in the parking lot. From nearby witnesses, Mills learned that the driver was a woman wearing black. In the Mercedes, Mills recovered a purse containing a California driver’s license bearing appellant’s name (Chivetta Overstreet) and picture. LAPD officer Luis Carmona responded to the scene. After receiving a description of appellant, he saw her crossing a nearby street and arrested her.
Appellant was charged by information with fleeing a police chase while driving recklessly (Veh. Code, § 2800.2). It was further alleged she had suffered two prior prison sentences (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subds. (b), (e)(1)) that also were felony convictions under Penal Code section 1203. On August 6, 2015, a jury convicted appellant as charged. The People declined to proceed with a court trial on the two prison priors, and the parties agreed that appellant would be sentenced to a midterm of two years to be served concurrent with prison sentences in two other cases. The court sentenced appellant in accordance with the parties’ agreement.
Appellant timely appealed. After examining the record, appointed appellate counsel filed a brief raising no issues, but asking this court to independently review the record on appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441-442. (See Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 264.) On November 3, 2017, this court sent a letter advising appellant she had 30 days to submit a brief or letter raising any contention or argument which she wishes this court to consider. No response was received.
This court has examined the entire record in accordance with People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at pages 441-442, and is satisfied appellant’s attorney has fully complied with the responsibilities of counsel, and no arguable issues exist. Accordingly, we affirm.


DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.



MANELLA, J.

We concur:



WILLHITE, Acting P. J.



COLLINS, J.