P. v. Hurst

Filed 3/21/06 P. v. Hurst 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Michael S. Hider, Judge. Affirmed.

Diane Nichols, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

On August 1, 2005, the defendant, represented by counsel, pled guilty to a violation of Health and Safety Code, section 11379, subdivision (a), sale and transportation of methamphetamine, and admitted various special allegations charged in the information filed by the District Attorney of Riverside County.

Thereafter, on August 22, 2005, and in accordance with the negotiated disposition, the defendant was committed to state prison for eight years and awarded the appropriate custody credits.

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.

The defendant filed a four page supplemental letter brief which was read and considered.

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

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS

RAMIREZ

P.J.

We concur:

McKINSTER

J.

KING

J.

Publication courtesy of California pro bono legal advice.

Analysis and review provided by La Mesa Apartment Manager Lawyers