People v. Young CA4/1 ( 2023 )

Filed 1/31/23 P. v. Young 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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, D080660
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v. (Super. Ct. No. SCD293752)
DESHAWN M. YOUNG,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County,
Polly H. Shamoon, Judge. Affirmed.
Nathanael Crowley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for
Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Deshawn M. Young pleaded guilty to possession of a loaded firearm in
public (Pen. Code, § 25850, subd. (a)) and misdemeanor possession of cocaine
(Health and Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)). Young was granted probation for
two years subject to various conditions. One of the conditions of probation
required that Young use “no marijuana at all.” Young did not object to the
condition.
Young filed a timely notice of appeal.
Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979)
25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) indicating counsel has not been able to identify any
arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to review the
record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered Young the opportunity to
file his own brief on appeal, but he has not responded.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Young admitted he possessed a loaded firearm in public and that he
possessed cocaine.
DISCUSSION
As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks
the court to review the record for error. To assist the court in its review, and
in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel
has identified a possible issue that was considered in evaluating the potential
merits of this appeal: Whether the trial court erred in imposing a “no
marijuana use” condition in light of the convictions for possession of cocaine
and a loaded firearm.
We have reviewed the entire record as required by Wende and Anders.
We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal.
Competent counsel has represented Young on this appeal.
2
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
HUFFMAN, J.
WE CONCUR:
McCONNELL, P. J.
IRION, J.
3