Fear Not Law Articles: P. v. Lewis

P. v. Lewis

Filed 9/6/06 P. v. Lewis CA2/7

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SEVEN

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

ANTHONY GERARD LEWIS,

Defendant and Appellant.

B180009

(Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. TA 073046)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Jack W. Morgan, Judge. Affirmed.

William L. Heyman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Lawrence M. Daniels and Timothy M. Weiner, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_________________________

Anthony Gerard Lewis appeals from his conviction of possession for sale of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5). The trial court found true allegations of two prior convictions of serious or violent felonies (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1150.12, subds. (a)-(d)).[1] On appeal, defendant contends (1) the trial court erred in denying his motion to traverse the affidavit in support of the search warrant and suppress evidence; (2) the trial court erroneously instructed the jury; (3) trial counsel was ineffective; (4) the trial court committed numerous errors with respect to his prior convictions; (5) the trial court committed numerous sentencing errors; and (6) the trial court erred in failing to halt the sentencing hearing and appoint counsel. We affirm.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

A. Prosecution Case.

On January 7, 2004, Detective Richard Guzman, Officer Michael Owens and Officer Fenstermacher of the LAPD went to a house at 340 East 92nd Street in Los Angeles to execute a narcotics detail search warrant. All officers were in uniform or wearing narcotics ballistics entry vests and jackets identifying them as police officers. Officer Fenstermacher knocked on the door and shouted â€

Description	Appellant appeals from his conviction of possession for sale of cocaine base. The trial court found true allegations of two prior convictions of serious or violent felonies. On appeal, defendant contends (1) the trial court erred in denying his motion to traverse the affidavit in support of the search warrant and suppress evidence; (2) the trial court erroneously instructed the jury; (3) trial counsel was ineffective; (4) the trial court committed numerous errors with respect to his prior convictions; (5) the trial court committed numerous sentencing errors; and (6) the trial court erred in failing to halt the sentencing hearing and appoint counsel. Court affirm.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.