People v. Vansteen CA3

Filed 8/7/23 P. v. Vansteen 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C096924

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 17F3715) v.

JOSHUA RAY VANSTEEN,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Joshua Ray Vansteen filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) After reviewing the entire record, we will affirm the judgment. We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)

1

I. BACKGROUND The prosecution charged defendant with possession of a controlled substance for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378), transportation of a controlled substance for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379, subd. (a)), interception and use of police radio communications (Pen. Code, § 636.5), and false evidence of vehicle registration (Veh. Code, § 4462.5). Defendant filed a motion to suppress evidence under Penal Code section 1538.5, arguing evidence of the offenses was obtained in an illegal search of his vehicle. The trial court denied the motion. Defendant pled no contest to the transportation of a controlled substance for sale count. The prosecution dismissed the other counts and the parties stipulated to the factual basis in the police report, which explained a police officer had pulled defendant over for false registration. The officer used a narcotics detection dog, and the dog alerted to a backpack containing an electronic safe. Inside the safe, the officer found a baggie with 17.3 grams of methamphetamine, a digital scale, and additional baggies. The officer also found a police scanner, a counterfeit money scanner, another digital scale, and a large amount of cash. As part of the plea agreement, defendant would be placed on formal probation with 90 days in county jail. Defendant entered a Cruz1 waiver, then failed to appear for probation and for his sentencing hearing. He stipulated to a violation of the waiver. On February 14, 2019, the court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on a three-year term of probation with 120 days in county jail. The court imposed various fines and fees detailed in the written probation order.