People v. Bradford CA2/5

Filed 10/1/25 P. v. Bradford CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

THE PEOPLE, B339252

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. v. TA158028)

TRACY BRADFORD,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Roger T. Ito, Judge. Affirmed. Debbie Yen, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.

A jury convicted defendant and appellant Tracy Bradford (defendant) of sale of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352(a)) and two counts of possession for sale of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5). The trial court found true two alleged prior “strike” crimes and several aggravating factors and, after striking one of the strikes, sentenced defendant to 12 years in prison. Defendant appealed the judgment, and this court appointed counsel to represent him. After examining the record, defendant’s attorney on appeal filed an opening brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 that raises no issues and asks us to independently review the record. We invited defendant to personally submit a supplemental brief, and he filed a four-page letter attaching dozens of pages of documents. These include what appear to be records associated with an administrative forfeiture proceeding, bank records, and pages of the reporter’s transcript from defendant’s trial with handwritten annotations in the margins (mostly disputing the truth of witness testimony).1 In the paragraphs that follow, we summarize the facts and briefly explain why the contentions presented in defendant’s letter lack merit. In August 2022, several Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) officers staked out a van parked in a “problem location” for narcotics activity. They observed people lining up outside the van and appearing to engage in transactions with someone inside the van. The officers then moved in and detained defendant, who was inside the van and held title to the van. The officers found cocaine in a bag defendant was holding and in a bag beneath a