People v. Johnson CA3

Filed 2/3/14 P. v. Johnson CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Sacramento)

THE PEOPLE, C073100

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 12F06058)

v.

RICKY JOHNSON,

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 note corrections that must be made to the abstract, but otherwise 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.) PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND In September 2012, defendant was charged with possession of cocaine base for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5; count one), possession of cocaine base while armed with a loaded firearm (Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.1, subd. (a); count two), being a felon in possession of a firearm (Pen. Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1); count three), and

1

carrying a loaded firearm (Pen. Code, § 25850, subd. (a); count four). The People further alleged defendant had a prior conviction for the sale and transportation of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, §§ 11352, subd. (a), 11370.2, subd. (a)) and two prior strike convictions (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12). Defendant pled no contest to the charge of being a felon in possession of a firearm and admitted one of the prior strike convictions. In exchange, the People agreed to a stipulated state prison sentence of four years and dismissal of the remaining charges and enhancement allegations. At the plea hearing, the People offered the following as the factual basis for the plea: “On or about September 8th, 2012, in the County of Sacramento, the defendant did commit a felony violation of section 29800[, subdivision] (a)(1) of the Penal Code, in that the defendant did willfully and unlawfully possess and have control of a firearm, a loaded Taurus .357 revolver. The defendant having previously been convicted of a felony section 11352 of the Health and Safety Code on or about September 14th, 2001 in the Superior Court, State of California in the County of Sacramento.” Defendant was subsequently sentenced in accordance with his plea and ordered to pay various fines and fees, including a $40 court operations assessment (Pen. Code, § 1465.8) and a $30 conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373). Defendant also was awarded 193 days of custody credit. Defendant appeals; his request for a certificate of probable cause was denied. WENDE REVIEW Appointed counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asked 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 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed and we have received no communication from defendant.