 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
People v. Staleny1/21/2003
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
On February 25, 2002, defendant Gayle Staleny was charged by complaint with the following: Count 1-possession of cocaine base for sale (Health & Saf., § 11351.5), and alleging a prior conviction within the meaning of Health & Safety Code section 11370.2, subdivision (a); Count 2-sale or transportation of cocaine base (Health and Saf. Code, § 11352) with a prior conviction within the meaning of Health and Safety Code section 11370.2, subdivision (a) and a prison prior within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b); Count 3-being under the influence of cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11550, subd. (a)); Count 4-driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a)); and Count 5-giving false information to a peace officer (Pen. Code, § 148.9, subd. (a)).
On March 11, 2002, defendant pleaded guilty to Count 1 and admitted the alleged priors on condition she would receive no more than seven years in state prison. A written waiver was executed stating she understood and was waiving her rights to jury, to confront the witnesses against her, to use the processes of the court to compel the attendance of witnesses on her behalf, to present evidence on her own behalf, and her privilege against self-incrimination.
On May 15, 2002, defendant was sentenced to serve the mitigated term of three years for Count 1; three years for the narcotics prior; and one year for the prison prior, for a total prison commitment of seven years. All remaining counts were dismissed on the motion of the district attorney.
On July 11, 2002, defendant filed a timely notice of appeal. We appointed counsel to represent the defendant in this court.
Appointed counsel has filed an opening brief which states the case but raises no specific issues. The defendant was advised by this court of her right to submit written argument within 30 days. The court has received a response from the defendant, which has been read and considered.
Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we have reviewed the entire record and have concluded that there is no arguable issue on appeal.
The judgment is affirmed.
WE CONCUR:
Elia, Acting P.J.
Rushing, J.
|