Duarte

Certified for Partial Publication. [*]

Defendant agreed to participate as a load car driver in a large-scale cocaine trafficking conspiracy. Convicted of conspiracy to transport cocaine between noncontiguous counties, conspiracy to use a minor to transport cocaine, and possessing a false compartment and sentenced to 26 years in state prison, defendant appeals. He contends the evidence was insufficient to sustain a true finding on the allegation the cocaine weighed more than 40 kilograms (which true finding accounted for 20 years of his state prison term) and to sustain his conviction for possessing a false compartment. We find merit in these contentions. We also find merit in defendant's contention the trial court improperly imposed a laboratory analysis fee but find no merit in the rest of defendant's contentions. We therefore reverse as to the weight enhancement and the false compartment conviction and remand for resentencing.

Defendant was indicted along with 14 codefendants. Only three of the numerous counts applied to defendant: count one, conspiracy to transport cocaine between two noncontiguous counties (Pen.Code, § 182, subd. (a)(1) (conspiracy); Health &…

I concur in the judgment and opinion except as to part II of the Discussion, as to which I dissent. I would reverse the judgment as to count two, the use of a minor to transport cocaine.

The majority opinion has mislaid its grammar book. It pays no attention to the language of Health and Safety Code section 11353. “[T]o unlawfully transport” a controlled substance means to “carry” as the succeeding term says. (§ 11353.) It does not say “in” the transportation of or in the carrying of a controlled substance. Moreover, the operative terms to “hire[], employ[], or use[]” a minor to transport drugs patently mean to employ or use them to transport drugs. (§ 11353.) It does no good to resort to the intention of the Legislature to levitate the meaning when the intention is to be derived from the language *1239 of the statute. As the majority opinion notes, “there is no reported case concerning the issue presented here . . . .” (Maj. opn., ante, at p. 1237.) The reason is obvious.

Appellant’s petition for review by the Supreme Court was denied May 23, 2007, S151178.

Defendant agreed to participate as a load car driver in a large-scale cocaine trafficking conspiracy. Convicted of conspiracy to transport cocaine between noncontiguous counties, conspiracy to use a minor to transport cocaine, and possessing a false compartment and sentenced to 26 years in state prison, defendant appeals. He contends the evidence was insufficient to sustain a true finding on the allegation the cocaine weighed more than 40 kilograms (which true finding accounted for 20 years of his state prison term) and to sustain his conviction for possessing a false compartment. We find merit in these contentions. We also find merit in defendant’s contention the trial court improperly imposed a laboratory analysis fee but find no merit in the rest of defendant’s contentions. We therefore reverse as to the weight enhancement and the false compartment conviction and remand for resentencing.

PROCEDURE

Defendant was indicted along with 14 codefendants. Only three of the numerous counts applied to defendant: count one, conspiracy to transport cocaine between two noncontiguous counties (Pen. Code, § 182, subd. (a)(1) (conspiracy); Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (b));…