People v. Parker CA4/3

Filed 12/15/15 P. v. Parker CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G051645

v. (Super. Ct. No. 13CF2527)

JONATHAN GERALD PARKER, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Ronald E. Klar, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.) Affirmed. John E. Edwards, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

* * *

A jury convicted defendant Jonathan Gerald Parker of possessing methamphetamine (count1) and marijuana (count 2) for sale. (Health & Saf. Code, §§ 11378, 11359.) In bifurcated proceedings regarding sentence enhancement allegations, the court found true an allegation Parker was free from custody on bail at the time of these offenses, and Parker admitted he had suffered four prison prior convictions. (Pen. Code, §§ 12022.1, subd. (b) & 667.5, subd. (b).) The court sentenced Parker to a total term of six years in county jail, comprised of concurrent two-year middle terms on each of counts 1 and 2, plus consecutive two-year terms on the bail enhancement and two of the four prison priors. The court struck the remaining two prison priors for sentencing purposes only. The court stated it sentenced Parker in this manner because of his lengthy criminal history and the lack of a realistic chance of rehabilitation. The court granted Parker a total of 638 days of credit for time served, consisting of 319 days of actual custody and 319 days of conduct credit under Penal Code section 4019. After this appeal was filed, the court granted Parker’s informal request and awarded him an additional 20 days of presentence credits (10 actual plus 10 conduct) due to a flash incarceration in another case resulting from the conduct in this case. Parker filed a timely notice of appeal. We appointed counsel to represent Parker on appeal. Counsel filed a brief summarizing the proceedings and facts of the case and advised the court he found no arguable issues to assert on Parker’s behalf. (Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) To assist us in our independent review of the record, counsel suggested we consider the issues set out below. Counsel notified Parker that he could file a supplemental brief on his own behalf. We also notified Parker he could file a supplemental brief on his own behalf. However, the time for Parker to do so has passed and we have received no supplemental brief or other communication from him.