From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Dyson

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
Jul 23, 2008
No. D051973 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 23, 2008)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. KEITH DOUGLAS DYSON, Defendant and Appellant. D051973 California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, First Division July 23, 2008

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County No. SCN231017, Aaron H. Katz, Judge.

McDONALD, J.

Keith Douglas Dyson entered a negotiated guilty plea to burglary (Pen. Code, § 459) and admitted he had served a prior prison term within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b). Under the plea bargain, the prosecution agreed to dismiss the remaining charges against him: 24 counts of burglary, 19 counts of grand theft, six counts of petty theft of merchandise with a prior, one count of recklessly evading officers and one count of receiving stolen property. The parties also stipulated to a four-year prison term.

Statutory references are to the Penal Code.

The trial court sentenced Dyson to four years in prison in accordance with the plea bargain.

Dyson obtained a certificate of probable cause.

FACTS

During an eight-month period starting in November 2006, Dyson and another individual shoplifted diet pills and other high-priced merchandise from supermarkets and pharmacies in the San Diego area.

In pleading guilty to burglary, Dyson admitted he entered an Albertsons Supermarket with the intent to steal.

DISCUSSION

Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief setting forth evidence in the superior court. Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks that this court review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel refers to as possible, but not arguable, issues: (1) whether Dyson's negotiated plea was constitutionally valid; (2) whether there was a sufficient factual basis for the guilty plea; and (3) whether Dyson was properly advised about the rights being waived when he admitted a prior felony.

We granted Dyson permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not responded.

A review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, including the possible issues referred to by appellate counsel, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issues. Competent counsel has represented Dyson on this appeal.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

WE CONCUR: McCONNELL, P. J., NARES, J.


Summaries of

People v. Dyson

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
Jul 23, 2008
No. D051973 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 23, 2008)
Case details for

People v. Dyson

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. KEITH DOUGLAS DYSON, Defendant…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division

Date published: Jul 23, 2008

Citations

No. D051973 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 23, 2008)