 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
People v. Rooks6/5/2002
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
Victor J. Rooks appeals after he pleaded no contest to (1) selling or transporting cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (a)); (2) possessing a billy club (Pen. Code, § 12020, subd. (a)(1)); (3) possessing diazepam without a prescription (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 4060); (4) being under the influence of a narcotic (Health & Saf. Code, § 11550, subd. (a)); (5) driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a)); and (6) driving with a blood alcohol level greater than .08. Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (b).) Rooks also admitted having two prior offenses within the meaning of Penal Code sections 667, subdivisions (b)-(i) and 1170.12. The trial court granted Rooks's Penal Code section 1385 motion and struck one of the two prior offense allegations. Rooks was sentenced to a total term of nine years four months in state prison.
Appointed counsel filed an opening brief which states the case and the facts, but raises no specific issues. We notified defendant of his right to submit within 30 days written argument in his own behalf. In response, defendant has submitted a letter, which this court has 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:
Bamattre-Manoukian, acting p.J.
MIHARA, J.
|