P. v. Sharber
Filed 4/7/10 P. v. Sharber CA2/6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MARCUS DEWAYNE SHARBER, Defendant and Appellant. | 2d Crim. No. B218152 (Super. Ct. No. 1287751) (Santa Barbara County) |
Marcus Dewayne Sharber appeals the judgment entered after he pleaded guilty to possessing cocaine for sale (Health & Saf. Code,[1] 11351). Pursuant to a negotiated disposition, the trial court sentenced him to two years in state prison. In exchange for appellants plea, counts charging possession of cocaine base for sale ( 11351.5) and possession of methamphetamine for sale ( 11378) were dismissed, along with allegations that he had suffered a prior drug-related conviction ( 11370.2, subd. (a)) and a prior strike conviction (Pen. Code, 667, subd. (e)(1), 1170.12, subd. (c)(1), 1192.7, subd. (c)(24)), and had served a prior prison term (Pen. Code, 667.5, subd. (b)).
On August 14, 2008, Lompoc Police officers executed a search warrant at a motel room rented by appellants girlfriend. Appellant was not present at the time of the search. Methamphetamine, cocaine, cocaine base, as scale, packaging material, and cash were found inside the room. The officers also found mens clothing and receipts with appellants name on the men. Appellant was later arrested at a nearby restaurant.
After appellant filed a notice of appeal, the trial court granted his request for a certificate of probable cause to challenge his guilty plea on grounds of coercion and misrepresentation. We subsequently appointed counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. After counsels examination of the record, he filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised.
On December 21, 2009, we sent a letter to appellant at Wasco State Prison advising him that he had 30 days in which to submit a written brief or letter stating any contentions or arguments he wished us to consider. The letter was returned as undeliverable with a notation stating that appellant was paroled on November 16, 2009. Appointed counsel was contacted and gave us appellants most recent home address. On March 18, 2010, the letter we sent to that address was also returned as undeliverable. Appointed counsel does not have any other forwarding address for appellant.
We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that appellants attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.
PERREN, J.
We concur:
GILBERT, P.J.
YEGAN, J.
James F. Iwasko, Judge
Superior Court County of Santa Barbara
______________________________
California Appellate Project, Jonathan B. Steiner, Executive Director, Richard B. Lennon, Staff Attorney, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Publication Courtesy of California free legal resources.
Analysis and review provided by Spring Valley Property line Lawyers.
San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com
[1] All further undesignated statutory references are to the Health and Safety Code.
