P. v. Jackson CA4/1 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  • Filed 6/13/13 P. v. Jackson CA4/1
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
    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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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.
    COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
    DIVISION ONE
    STATE OF CALIFORNIA
    THE PEOPLE,                                                         D062614
    Plaintiff and Respondent,
    v.                                                         (Super. Ct. No. SCD240198)
    DANIEL JACKSON,
    Defendant and Appellant.
    APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Dwayne
    K. Moring, Judge. Affirmed.
    John L. Dodd & Associates and John L. Dodd, under appointment by the Court of
    Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
    No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
    In April 2012 defendant Daniel Jackson entered a guilty plea to petty theft with a
    prior in exchange for a stipulated sentence of two years to be served locally. A prior
    grant of probation was revoked. In May 2012 Jackson filed a motion to withdraw his
    guilty plea. In June 2012 the court noted that it had read the motion, but stated it "takes
    no action at this time."
    In July 2012 Jackson filed a motion seeking to modify his sentence due to his
    "terminal illness and need for adequate medical care." He requested probation with home
    arrest and GPS monitoring. He had been diagnosed with HIV and hepatitis C. In August
    2012 the court found that there had been a stipulated sentence pursuant to a plea bargain
    so it did not have "discretion to recall or modify the sentence" and took "no action at this
    time."
    Jackson filed a timely notice of appeal and asks us to examine the record and
    determine if there are any issues deserving of further briefing. (People v. Wende (1979)
    
    25 Cal.3d 436
     (Wende).) We have done so, find none, and hence affirm the judgment.
    FACTUAL BACKGROUND
    On June 1, 2011, officers observed Jackson at an intersection, appearing "nervous
    and hyperactive" and saw that "his face was shiny and wet." He was searched and the
    officers found four grams of marijuana and 0.2 grams of methamphetamine. He also
    appeared to be under the influence of a controlled substance.
    On April 5, 2012, Jackson took an item from a Walmart without paying.
    DISCUSSION
    On appeal, Jackson's appointed appellate counsel filed an opening brief pursuant
    to Wende requesting that we conduct an independent review of the record to determine
    whether there are any arguable appellate issues. (Wende, supra, 
    25 Cal.3d 436
    .) Under
    Anders v. California (1967) 
    386 U.S. 738
    , he listed as a possible but not arguable issue
    2
    whether the court erred in denying his motion to modify his sentence. We granted
    Jackson permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not responded.
    We have examined the record pursuant to Wende and considered the possible issue
    referred to by appointed counsel. We find no reasonably arguable appellate issue.
    Competent counsel has represented Jackson on this appeal.
    NARES, Acting P. J.
    WE CONCUR:
    McINTYRE, J.
    O'ROURKE, J.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: D062614

Filed Date: 6/13/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021