 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
People v. Buckius5/28/2003
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
Appellant Nghia Trong Tran Buckius was convicted by a jury of: possession of cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a); Count 1) as a lesser included offense of possession of cocaine for sale; transportation of cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352; Count 2); and possession of a smoking device, a misdemeanor (Health & Saf. Code, § 11364; Count 4). He pled guilty to two other misdemeanors: providing false information to a police officer (Veh. Code, § 31; Count 3), and driving with a suspended license (Veh. Code, § 14601.1, subd. (a); Count 5). The court found that appellant had a prior Health and Safety Code section 11351 conviction within the meaning of Health and Safety Code section 11370.2, subdivision (a), and had served two prior prison terms within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b). The court sentenced appellant to six years in prison, representing the low term of three years for Count 2, plus three years pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 11370.2, subdivision (a). The court: stayed the sentence on Count 1 pursuant to Penal Code section 654; imposed no sentences on Counts 3, 4, and 5; and struck the prior prison term enhancements pursuant to Penal Code section 1385.
Appellant contends that it was an abuse of discretion for the court to deny his motion to dismiss Counts 3 and 5 in order to make him eligible for probation under Proposition 36, the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000. We affirm.
I.
Appellant was pulled over by Mill Valley Police Sergeant Ken Dunkel shortly after midnight on October 3, 2000, for erratic driving; Dunkel suspected that appellant might be driving under the influence . Dunkel asked appellant for his driver's license, registration and proof of insurance. Appellant did not have proof of insurance and said that he had left his driver's license at home. Appellant told Dunkel that he had recently purchased the car, and gave him a registration card for the "still-registered owner," which had a notation from a Mr. Griffin with the name "Long Truong." Dunkel asked appellant to write his name as it would appear on his driver's license, and appellant wrote "Long Truong."
Dunkel attempted to make a Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) license check, but the DMV computers were "unavailable." He began searching the car for indicia of ownership, and found what appeared to be a crack pipe in a side pocket of the driver's door. Dunkel arrested appellant for possession of drug paraphernalia and continued searching the car. He found among other things court documents with the name "Buckius." At this point the DMV computers were working, and Dunkel learned that the name Buckius matched someone with a suspended license who fit appellant's description. Confronted with this information, appellant admitted that his name was Buckius. When Dunkel searched appellant at the police station, he found rocks of cocaine weighing 3.95 grams in a baggie in a sock, .32 grams of cocaine in a shirt pocket, and over $1,500 in cash.
Evidence was introduced of two prior uncharged offenses. When police officers searched appellant's apartment on December 2, 1998, they found: three items weighing 6.61, 17.85, and 1.83 grams that tested positive for cocaine base; a fourth item weighing 50.96 grams that tested positive for cocaine salt; and materials for t
Page 1 2 3 California DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|