People v. Roberson CA3

Filed 9/3/24 P. v. Roberson CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Butte) ----

THE PEOPLE, C099484

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 22CF05221)

v.

SAM ERNEST ROBERSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Sam Ernest Roberson filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks this court to independently review the record on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable errors that would result in a disposition more favorable to Roberson, we affirm the judgment. BACKGROUND In 2022, a police officer observed a plastic bag in Roberson’s vehicle during a traffic stop. Roberson admitted that the bag contained methamphetamine. The People charged him with possession of a controlled substance after a specified prior conviction (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) and alleged a prior strike. Roberson pleaded no

1

contest to possession of a controlled substance. After considering aggravating and mitigating circumstances, the trial court sentenced him to the upper term of three years. Roberson timely appealed. DISCUSSION Appointed counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts and procedural history of the case and asks this court to review the record. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 436.) Counsel advised Roberson of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days from the date the opening brief was filed. More than 30 days have elapsed, and Roberson has not filed a supplemental brief. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record pursuant to Wende, we find no arguable errors that would result in a disposition more favorable to Roberson. We therefore affirm the judgment. DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.

/s/ FEINBERG, J.

We concur:

/s/ EARL, P. J.