P. v. Romero
Filed 5/14/08 P. v. Romero CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LUIS ROMERO, Defendant and Appellant. | F053824 (Super. Ct. No. MF007818A) O P I N I O N |
THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. John Oglesby, Judge.
Deborah Prucha, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
-ooOoo-
It was alleged in an information filed April 27, 2007, that appellant Luis Romero was in possession of a weapon while confined in a penal institution (Pen. Code, 4502), subdivision (a), and that he had suffered a strike.[1] Pursuant to a plea agreement, on June 26, 2007, appellant pled no contest to a lesser offense, viz., manufacture of a weapon while confined in a penal institution (Pen. Code, 4502, subd. (b)), and admitted the strike allegation. Immediately thereafter, appellant requested immediate sentencing and the court imposed a four-year prison term, consisting of the two-year midterm on the substantive offense, doubled pursuant to the three strikes law (Pen. Code, 667, subd. (e)(1); 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)). The court ordered the term to run consecutively to the term appellant was serving at the time of the instant offense.
Appellants appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which summarizes the pertinent facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks that this court independently review the record. (Peoplev.Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d. 436.) Appellant has not responded to this courts invitation to submit additional briefing.
Correctional Officer William Herider testified to the following at appellants preliminary hearing. On October 14, 2006, appellant was on contraband watch at California Correctional Institute at Tehachapi. He came from the bus at Wasco, and he failed the metal detector test. At approximately 7:50 a.m., appellant indicated he had to go to the bathroom. He defecated, and the fecal matter was collected in a plastic bag. Officer Herider found in the fecal matter, a latex glove finger that had been tied off at one end into a knot. Inside the glove finger, the officer found a piece of metal with sharpened edges, approximately three and one-quarter inches in length.
Following independent review of the record, we have concluded that no reasonably arguable legal or factual issues exist.
The judgment is affirmed.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney directory.
Analysis and review provided by Oceanside Property line Lawyers.
San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com
*Before Wiseman, Acting P.J., Levy, J., and Gomes, J.
[1] We use the term strike as a synonym for prior felony conviction within the meaning of the three strikes law ( 667, subds. (b)-(i); 1170.12), i.e., a prior felony conviction or juvenile adjudication that subjects a defendant to the increased punishment specified in the three strikes law.
