Summary
In People v. Massett (7 N.Y. Supp. 839), relied upon by the appellant, it is clear that if any crime was committed it was committed by the three persons acting together, and it was held that an acquittal of the two was inconsistent with the conviction of the third, and the conviction was, therefore, set aside.
Summary of this case from People v. MunroeOpinion
D070697
02-16-2017
Lindsey M. Ball, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. SCN337293-1) APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, K. Michael Kirkman, Judge. Affirmed. Lindsey M. Ball, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Donnie J. Massett entered into a plea agreement under which he pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter (Pen. Code, § 192, subd. (a)) and admitted the gang enhancement (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)). The parties stipulated to a determinate term of 16 years. Massett was sentenced to a 16-year term in accordance with the plea agreement.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified. --------
Massett filed a timely notice of appeal and obtained a certificate of probable cause. (§ 1237.5.)
Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), indicating she has not identified any reasonably arguable issue for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered Massett the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal, but he has not responded.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The facts are taken from the stipulation which accompanied the change of plea. Massett, together with two codefendants, killed another person in association with a street gang.
DISCUSSION
As we have noted, appellate counsel has not identified any reasonably arguable issues for reversal on appeal and asked this court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436. Counsel has complied with the mandate of Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), and has identified the following possible issues to assist this court in its review of the record:
1. Whether the court sentenced Massett in accordance with the plea agreement; and
2. Whether there was a sufficient basis for the gang enhancement allegation.
We have reviewed the entire record as mandated by Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738. We have not identified any reasonably arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Massett on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
/s/_________
HUFFMAN, J. WE CONCUR: /s/_________
McCONNELL, P. J. /s/_________
NARES, J.