People v. Pipkins CA5

Filed 3/8/16 P. v. Pipkins CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

THE PEOPLE, F069671 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. BF147528A & v. BF145924B)

JUSTIN RYAN PIPKINS, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Charles R. Brehmer, Judge. Janice Wellborn, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo- Justin Ryan Pipkins entered into a plea agreement resolving two separate cases that had been filed against him. His appellate counsel filed a brief asserting she did not

* Before Levy, Acting P.J., Franson, J. and Smith, J.

identify any arguable issues in the case. After reviewing the record, we agree and affirm the judgment. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY On December 28, 2012, a complaint was filed in case No. BF145924B. The amended information charged Pipkins with five crimes: (1) maintaining a place for the purposes of selling methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11366); (2) child endangerment (Pen. Code, § 273a, subd. (a))1; (3) possession of methamphetamine for the purposes of sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378); (4) maintaining a place for the purposes of selling marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11366); and (5) misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia (former Health & Saf. Code, § 11364.1). Counts one through four also alleged as enhancements that Pipkins had suffered a prior conviction that constituted a strike within the meaning of section 667, subdivisions (b)-(i), and three prior felony convictions that resulted in a prison sentence within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b). On March 26, 2013, a complaint was filed in case No. BF147528A. The information charged Pipkins with three crimes: (1) possession of a stolen vehicle in violation of section 496d, subdivision (a), with a prior conviction for violating section 496d, subdivision (a) within the meaning of section 666.5, subdivision (a); (2) buying a stolen vehicle (§ 496d, subd. (a)); and (3) misdemeanor possession of burglary tools (§ 466). Counts one and two alleged as enhancements that Pipkins had suffered a prior conviction that constituted a strike within the meaning of section 667, subdivisions (b)- (i), and three prior felony convictions that resulted in a prison sentence within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b). On May 22, 2014, the two cases were called for trial, with case No. BF145924B being tried first, and case No. BF147528A trailing. The jury in case No. BF14592B