(Super. Ct. Nos. 10F5058, 10F6764, 10F5465)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Robie , J.
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
Counsel for defendant, Daniel Lee Cox, asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant filed a supplemental brief claiming the trial court erred in denying his Romero*fn1 motion. We disagree. Also, finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
First Case (Case No. 10F5058)
On June 30, 2010, following a traffic stop, defendant was found in possession of 436.9 grams of marijuana in five separate baggies and a cell phone containing text messages related to drug sales. Officers also found a digital gram scale in the vehicle in which defendant was traveling.
Defendant was charged with possession of marijuana for sale, transportation of marijuana, being a felon in possession of ammunition, operating a vehicle without a functioning interlock device, driving with a suspended license, and failing to wear a seatbelt. It was further alleged that defendant was twice previously convicted of a serious or violent felony, served a prior term in prison, and committed the current offenses while out on bail or on his own recognizance in other cases.
Second Case (Case No. 10F5465)
On August 3, 2010, defendant was again stopped while driving a vehicle. On this occasion, defendant was stopped because his license plate was obstructed and the registration sticker had expired. After the traffic stop, the officer observed defendant "reaching around within the vehicle," then into a black backpack inside the vehicle. Defendant was asked to "stop digging around" and put his hands where the officer could see them.
Defendant complied with the officer's direction. The officer then told defendant why he had been stopped; defendant told the officer the vehicle did not belong to him, but he was in the process of buying it. Defendant admitted he did not have his driver's license with him and that it was, in fact, suspended or revoked.
Defendant consented to a search of the vehicle, saying the backpack inside the vehicle was his. Inside the backpack, were a Ziploc baggie containing 14.4 grams of methamphetamine, a hypodermic needle, a digital scale, and three rounds of .25-caliber full-metal-jacket ammunition. A further search of the vehicle uncovered a glass ...