People v. Stevens CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 27, 2014D065034California351 words

Opinion

Opinion

Huffman, J.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

On March 7, 2011, Stevens "transported [44.3 grams of] methamphetamine not for

personal use with three priors for sales or transportation and five prison priors."

DISCUSSION

As we have indicated, appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Wende, supra,

25 Cal.3d 436, requesting this court to review the record for error. Additionally, pursuant

to Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738, counsel has indentified one possible, but not reasonably

arguable issue for our consideration.

First, however, we will deal with the letter brief filed by Stevens on his own

behalf.

Stevens essentially challenges the trial court's exercise of discretion. He argues

his sentence is cruel and unusual given what he describes as the inadequate conditions of

the county jail in which he will serve his sentence. His arguments are based on his

2 current perception of the conditions in the jail but are not based on the matters raised in

the trial court. As such they are not properly before this court on appeal. (People v. Scott

(1994) 9 Cal.4th 331, 348-351.) To the extent Stevens believes his current confinement

violates the Eighth Amendment, his remedy, if any, is by way of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.