The People v. Lewis CA3

Filed 9/6/13 P. v. Lewis CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Colusa) ----

THE PEOPLE, C071995

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CR53964)

v.

ALISA ANN LEWIS,

Defendant and Appellant.

This case comes to us pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Having reviewed the record as required by Wende, we affirm the judgment. We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.) FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On April 23, 2012, defendant entered a pharmacy and presented two prescriptions to the pharmacist -- one for oxycodone and the other for Norco. The pharmacist became

1

suspicious since both medications were narcotics and he did not recognize defendant. The pharmacist told defendant he did not have the medications on hand and to return in two days to pick them up. He then called the physician listed on the prescription, who informed him that she did not have a patient by defendant’s name and had not issued the prescriptions. Defendant was arrested when she returned to pick up the medications. Defendant was charged with second degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459) and forging or altering a prescription (Health & Saf. Code, § 11368). On August 15, 2012, defendant pleaded guilty to second degree burglary with the agreement that the remainder of the charges would be dismissed with a Harvey waiver.1 On August 29, 2012, the trial court denied defendant probation and sentenced her to the midterm of two years, to be served locally pursuant to Penal Code section 1170, subdivision (h). The trial court ordered defendant to pay a $400 restitution fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.4), a suspended $400 mandatory supervision restitution fine (id., § 1202.45, subd. (b)), a $40 court security fee (id., § 1465.8), and a $30 court facilities assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373). Defendant was awarded 59 actual days’ credit and 58 conduct days’ credit, for a total of 117 days of presentence custody credit. (Pen. Code, § 4019.) Defendant appeals. She did not obtain a certificate of probable cause. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5.) DISCUSSION We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within