1 

Filed 3/28/13 P. v. Asencio CA3 

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication 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. 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT 

(Shasta) 

---- 

THE PEOPLE, 

 Plaintiff and Respondent, 

 v. 

EDGAR STANLEY ASENCIO, 

 Defendant and Appellant. 

C071831 

(Super. Ct. No. 12F1616) 

 Defendant Edgar Stanley Asencio pleaded no contest to conspiracy to transport 

cocaine to a noncontiguous county for the purpose of sale. (Health & Saf. Code, 

§ 11352, subd. (b); Pen. Code, § 182, subd. (a)(1).) In exchange, a count of attempted 

possession of a controlled substance (Pen. Code, § 664; Health & Saf. Code, § 11351, 

subd. (a)) was dismissed. 

 Defendant was sentenced to county jail for three years. (Pen. Code, § 1170, subd. 

(h).) Execution of the final two years was suspended and defendant was placed under 

mandatory supervision by the probation department for those two years. 
2 

 Defendant was awarded 100 days’ custody credit and 100 days’ conduct credit, 

and was ordered to pay a $760 fine (Pen. Code, § 672) including penalty assessments, a 

$240 restitution fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.4) plus administrative fee, a $190 laboratory 

analysis fee (Health & Saf. Code, § 11372.5, subd. (a)) including penalty assessments, a 

$40 court operations fee (Pen. Code, § 1465.8, subd. (a)(1)), a $30 court facilities 

assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373), and a $151 booking fee. 

FACTS

 Because the matter was resolved by plea, our statement of facts is taken from the 

probation officer’s report. 

 In March 2012, a confidential reliable informant (CRI) told a commander of the 

local narcotics task force that an unknown Hispanic male from the State of Washington 

wanted to purchase a kilogram of cocaine for $20,000 to $25,000. The CRI made 

arrangements to meet the male in Shasta County. 

 While waiting in a commercial parking lot, the CRI received a telephone call from 

the male who advised that he and two friends would arrive in a blue station wagon. Later 

that afternoon, a blue station wagon arrived. The driver, later identified as defendant, and 

two other males spoke to the CRI. Due to inclement weather, the males entered the 

CRI’s car where they conversed for about five minutes. When they got out of the car, 

defendant reached into the rear passenger area of the station wagon and showed 

something to the CRI. The CRI observed numerous bundles of United States currency in 

a vacuum sealed bag. At that point, defendant and the other two males were placed under 

arrest. 

 A search of the blue station wagon revealed $20,000 cash in the form of 10 

bundles of $20 bills. A cellular telephone, a phone charger, and a Global Positioning 

System unit were found in the center console. A search of defendant’s person yielded an 

additional $1,000 in $20 bills. 
3 

 Following an advisement of his constitutional rights, defendant acknowledged his 

participation in the plan to purchase cocaine. 

DISCUSSION

 We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening 

brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and 

determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 

25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental 

brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, 

and we received no communication from defendant. Having undertaken an examination 

of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more 

favorable to defendant. 

DISPOSITION

 The judgment is affirmed. 

 HULL , J. 

We concur: 

 RAYE , P. J. 

 HOCH , J.