P. v. Phillips

Filed 10/11/06 P. v. Phillips CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

JOSEPH ANTHONY PHILLIPS,

Defendant and Appellant.

E040263

(Super.Ct.Nos. SWF013110 &

SWF015002)

OPINION

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Arjuna (Vic) Saraydarian, Judge. Affirmed.

Marilee Marshall, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

In case No. SWF13110, defendant pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a).) Although defendant was granted diversion under Penal Code section 1000, it was terminated when he failed to appear at a scheduled hearing to document his enrollment in a diversion program and he reoffended. He was granted probation and his request for a certificate of probable cause was granted by the trial court.

In case No. SWF15002, defendant pled guilty to possessing precursors with intent to manufacture methamphetamine. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11383, subd. (c)(1).) He was granted probation, which was the agreed-to disposition. The trial court granted his request for a certificate of probable cause.

Defendant appealed, and upon his request this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493] setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record.

We offered the defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.

We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.

DISPOSITION

The judgments are affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

/s/ RAMIREZ

P.J.

We concur:

/s/ McKINSTER

/s/ MILLER

Publication Courtesy of California lawyer directory.

Analysis and review provided by Escondido Property line attorney.

Description	In case No. SWF13110, defendant pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine. Although defendant was granted diversion under Penal Code section 1000, it was terminated when he failed to appear at a scheduled hearing to document his enrollment in a diversion program and he reoffended. Defendant was granted probation and his request for a certificate of probable cause was granted by the trial court. In case No. SWF15002, defendant pled guilty to possessing precursors with intent to manufacture methamphetamine. Defendant was granted probation, which was the agreed-to disposition. Defendant appealed requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record. Court concluded independent review of the record and found no arguable issues.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.