Opinion
E072315
10-07-2019
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DAVID CARLTON BROWN, Defendant and Appellant.
John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super.Ct.No. SWF1707283) OPINION APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. L. Jackson Lucky IV, Judge. Affirmed. John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant and appellant David Carlton Brown was charged by amended information with grand theft. (Pen Code, § 487, subd. (a), count 1.) The information also alleged that defendant had one prior strike conviction. (§§ 1170.12, subd. (c)(1) & 667, subds. (c) & (e)(1).) A trial court denied his request under People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 (Marsden) to appoint substitute counsel. Defendant then waived his right to counsel and requested to represent himself. He filed numerous handwritten motions, which the court denied. He filed a Pitchess motion seeking discovery of the personnel files of the officers involved in making his arrest. The court granted the motion and conducted an in-camera review but found that none of the information was discoverable.
All further statutory references will be to the Penal Code.
Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531.
A jury found defendant guilty of count 1, and the court found true the prior strike conviction allegation. Defendant filed a motion for new trial, which the court denied. He then asked for counsel to be appointed for sentencing purposes; thus, the court appointed counsel. Counsel filed a Romero motion to strike defendant's prior strike conviction, which the court granted. It then sentenced him to the upper term of three years in state prison on count 1, with 632 days of credit for time served.
People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497 --------
Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal. We affirm.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
L.J. (the store manager) worked as the manager of a Guitar Center store. One day, she was working and observed two men with guitar cases on the main guitar floor. She asked if they needed help, and they said they were just looking. She then asked other store associates to keep an eye on them, since the store had experienced thefts before. The store manager later observed the two men in the keyboard section of the store, which she thought was odd, since they were carrying guitar cases. She had the associates check for empty hooks on the walls where the guitars were hanging, which would indicate missing guitars.
J.B. (the customer service manager) was working that day, and the store manager alerted him as to the two men in the store when he returned from his lunch break. He and other store employees discovered two locations where guitars were missing. A sales tag identifying a specific guitar and its price was located on the floor behind an amplifier in the bass room, and another sales tag was found behind a different amplifier. One of the employees called the police.
The customer service manager double-checked the inventory to make sure the guitars indicated on the sales tags were still in the store's inventory. They were supposed to be in the inventory, so the employees checked the warehouse and all over the store but could not find the guitars.
The two men with the guitar cases were in the vault, which was a guitar room where customers were allowed to go and play high-end instruments. The customer service manager saw two guitar cases sitting outside the vault, so he went in the vault and asked the men if the cases belonged to them. They said yes, so he asked if they would mind if he checked the cases. They consented. He opened up the cases and found the guitars that were missing. He thanked the men for letting him look in their cases and went to talk to the store manager. He then stepped outside the store and waited for the police.
The two men walked out of the store, carrying their guitar cases. When the men saw the police officers outside the store, they turned around and tried to run back in the store. However, the police confronted them and did not allow them to go back in. The retail value of the two guitars the men walked out of the store with was approximately $3,000. One of the men was identified as defendant.
DISCUSSION
Defendant appealed and, upon his request, this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, setting forth a statement of the case and a few potential arguable issues: (1) whether the trial court took a proper waiver of defendant's right to counsel; (2) whether criminal proceedings should have been suspended pursuant to section 1368, when the prosecutor commented that defendant's written motion suggested he was delusional; and (3) whether the evidence proved only the crime of attempted theft. Counsel has also requested this court to undertake a review of the entire record.
We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.
Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have conducted an independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
McKINSTER
Acting P. J. We concur: MILLER
J. SLOUGH
J.