People v. McPherson CA3

Filed 3/14/16 P. v. McPherson CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Shasta) ----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, C078083

v. (Super. Ct. Nos. 12F6348, 14F4595) MICHAEL ROBERT MCPHERSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Michael Robert McPherson asked this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we will affirm the judgment.

1

I In case No. 12F6348, defendant pleaded guilty to vehicle theft with a prior felony conviction. (Pen. Code, § 666.5, subd. (a).)1 He also admitted two prior prison term enhancement allegations based on a 2006 felony conviction for possession of a controlled substance and a 2009 conviction for petty theft with a prior theft conviction. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a); § 666, 667.5, subd. (b).) On January 7, 2014, the trial court denied probation and sentenced defendant to county jail for six years with a split term consisting of the following: three years in jail and execution of the remaining three years in jail suspended with mandatory supervision for those three years. The trial court ordered credit for time served and awarded 457 days of presentence credit. In case No. 14F4595, defendant pleaded no contest to escape while charged with a felony (§ 4532, subd. (b)(1)) and admitted violating his mandatory supervision in case No. 12F6348. Proposition 47, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act, became effective on November 5, 2014. On November 7, 2014, the trial court sentenced defendant to a six-year eight-month state prison term. The trial court granted defendant’s request for a certificate of probable cause. II Appointed counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and asking 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 the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed and we initially received no communication from defendant. Nevertheless, we requested supplemental letter briefs from the parties because under Proposition 47, defendant’s prior felony offenses for possession of a controlled