People v. Rodriguez CA2/5

Filed 3/3/14 P. v. Rodriguez CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B250497

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. MA057472) v.

GREGORY RODRIGUEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, David Walgren, Judge. Affirmed. Bird & Bird, Karen Hunter Bird, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

INTRODUCTION Defendant and appellant Gregory Rodriguez (defendant) appealed the judgment of conviction. On appeal, appointed counsel for defendant filed an opening brief in accordance with People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 requesting that this court conduct an independent review of the record to determine if there are any issues which if resolved in defendant’s favor would require reversal or modification of the judgment. On January 16, 2014, we gave notice to defendant that his counsel had failed to find any arguable issues and that defendant had 30 days within which to submit by brief or letter any grounds of appeal, contentions, or arguments he wished this court to consider. Defendant did not file a response brief or letter. After independently reviewing the record, we affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND The District Attorney of Los Angeles County filed an information charging defendant with one count of cultivating marijuana in violation of Health & Safety Code section 11358. The District Attorney alleged that defendant had suffered four convictions within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b). Defendant entered a plea of no contest on the count of cultivating marijuana and admitted that he suffered the four convictions, in exchange for a suspended seven-year prison term. The trial court placed defendant on formal probation subject to certain terms and conditions. Defendant admitted a violation of probation and the trial court reinstated probation subject to certain terms and conditions. About three months later, defendant again admitted a violation of probation. The trial court revoked defendant’s probation; imposed on defendant the seven year prison term that it had previously suspended; ordered defendant to pay various fees, fines and penalties; and awarded defendant custody credit.