Opinion
E069928
05-29-2018
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CRAIG DEROME HOLLAND, Defendant and Appellant.
Reed Webb, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. BAF1500934) OPINION APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Becky Dugan, Judge. Affirmed. Reed Webb, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On June 21, 2016, defendant and appellant Craig Holland pled guilty to one count of spousal battery inflicting corporal injury with a prior conviction under Penal Code section 273.5, subdivision (f)(1). Additionally, defendant admitted that he had a conviction for a 1998 strike offense under Penal Code sections 667, subdivision (c) and (3), and 1170.12, subdivision (c)(1). Moreover, defendant acknowledged that he was in violation of a grant of probation in case Number BAF1500165. In accordance with a negotiated plea agreement, the trial court sentenced defendant to state prison for the low term of two years, doubled to four years because of the strike. On the probation violation, the court sentenced defendant to serve a two-year concurrent sentence.
On October 16, 2017, defendant filed a petition for resentencing to reduce his felony conviction for the Penal Code section 273.5 offense to a misdemeanor. The prosecutor opposed the motion because defendant's felony did not qualify for a Penal Code section 1170.18 reduction. The trial court agreed with the prosecutor and entered an order denying defendant's petition on December 5, 2017.
On December 15, 2017, the People filed another written response to a motion filed by defendant asking for a correction in the length of his prison sentence. The abstract of judgment dated June 24, 2016, showed that defendant had been sentenced to the low term for Penal Code section 273.5, subdivision (f)(1). While the low term would be two years, the box showing the time imposed indicated four years. Another box checked at the lower left hand corner of the abstract of judgment indicated that defendant had been sentenced under "PC 667(b)-(i) or PC 1170.12 (strike prior)." The strike prior had the effect of doubling a low term of two years to four. On the same day, the trial court denied defendant's motion. The minute order stated, "The Court has read and considered the Ex-Parte Correspondence submitted by Defendant re: Motion to Correct A Sentence. The Court hereby denies motion as the defendant was properly sentenced to four years."
On February 1, 2018, defendant filed a notice of appeal. The notice of appeal indicated that "[t]his appeal is based on the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea that do not affect the validity of the plea. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b).)" The notice of appeal also indicated the appeal involved "modification of sentence."
DISCUSSION
After defendant appealed, and upon his request, this court appointed counsel to represent him. On January 18, 2018, 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, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues, and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record. After the appellate record was augmented, on March 7, 2018, counsel filed a supplemental brief providing a summary of the factual basis for the guilty plea in case Number FSB1600152.
We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief but he has not done so. Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have independently reviewed the record for potential error and find no error.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
MILLER
Acting P. J. We concur: CODRINGTON
J. SLOUGH
J.