People v. Brown CA2/2

Filed 3/10/16 P. v. Brown CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

THE PEOPLE, B265845

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA430468) v.

KENYON BROWN,

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT:*

A jury convicted Kenyon Brown (defendant) of selling cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (a)). In a separate proceeding, defendant admitted he had one prior serious/violent felony or strike conviction (Pen. Code, § 667, subds. (b)-(i)) and one prior conviction for selling cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (a)). The trial court sentenced defendant to eight years in state prison—the four-year middle term doubled pursuant to the “Three Strikes” law (§ 667, subd. (e)(1)). The Los Angeles Police Department was conducting a “buy-bust” operation when an undercover officer posing as a drug addict approached defendant and started a conversation. The officer told defendant he was trying to get a “dub” which is street vernacular for $20 worth of rock cocaine. The defendant responded by asking what was

* ASHMANN-GERST, Acting P.J., CHAVEZ, J., HOFFSTADT, J.

in it for him. The officer offered to “hook [him] up” and said he would give him $10. The officer gave defendant a prerecorded $20 bill to purchase the drugs, and waited on the street while defendant entered a residence. Upon exiting the house, defendant told the officer to wait while he went to retrieve the drugs. Defendant was picked up by a man driving a Ford Explorer and left the area. Approximately 10 minutes later, defendant returned and handed the officer 0.15 grams of rock cocaine. The officer gave defendant a prerecorded $10 bill in return, walked away, and signaled his fellow officers that a drug transaction had been completed. Defendant was arrested and the prerecorded $10 bill was found on his person. Testifying in his own defense, defendant stated he was homeless and panhandling when approached by the officer. When the officer inquired about obtaining drugs defendant told him that some “youngsters” who do fast sales would be coming through the area. The officer was insistent and gave defendant a $20 bill. Defendant testified that the officer looked like he needed a fix and so he agreed to help him out. Defendant obtained the cocaine for the officer because he believed the officer was going to share it with him. The officer did not; gave defendant a $10 bill instead; and walked away. Defendant filed a timely appeal and we appointed counsel to represent him on appeal. Defendant’s appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), raising no issues. On December 15, 2015, 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 submitted a 16-page letter brief, in which he argues, as best we can determine, that: (1) his participation in the crime was “the product of false inducement and entrapment by law enforcement”; (2) the trial court should have instructed the jury on aiding and abetting, and possession; and (3) the court erred in sentencing defendant in light of his “extensive mental health history.” We construe defendant’s first contention as a claim of insufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict. In essence, defendant is asking us to reweigh the evidence,