Opinion
F085446
08-30-2023
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MANUEL MENDOZA, Defendant and Appellant.
Allen E. Junker, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tulare County No. PCF416679. Juliet L. Boccone, Judge.
Allen E. Junker, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
THE COURT [*]
STATEMENT OF APPEALABILITY
This appeal is made after no contest pleas and is limited to matters occurring after entry of the plea which do not challenge the plea. (Pen. Code, § 1237; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b)(2)(B).)
All statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise stated.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On September 15, 2022, the Tulare County District Attorney filed an amended information charged Mendoza with dissuading a witness, C.M. (§ 136.1, subd. (b)(1); count 1), dissuading a witness, A.A. (§ 136.1, subd. (b)(1); count 2), false imprisonment, C.M. (§ 236; count 3), false imprisonment, A.A. (§ 236; count 4), domestic battery (§ 243, subd. (e)(1); count 5), vandalism (§ 594; count 6), and reckless driving (Veh. Code, § 23103, subd. (a); count 7).
On September 15, 2022, Mendoza pleaded no contest to all of the counts after being advised of the immigration consequences and being advised of and waiving his constitutional rights.
At the October 17, 2022, sentencing hearing, the trial court suspended imposition of sentence, placed Mendoza on five years' probation, ordered him to participate in a 52-week batterer's treatment program, ordered him to serve 364 days in jail, awarded 161 days credits (81 actual and 80 conduct), and ordered him to pay a $500 section 1202.4 fine, a $500 section 1202.44 fine (suspended), a $280 section 14658 fee and a $210 Government Code section 70373 assessment.
On December 13, 2022, Mendoza filed a timely notice of appeal. He did not request a certificate of probable cause.
Because this matter was resolved by plea, the facts are drawn from the October 17, 2022, probation officer's report, and the preliminary hearing transcript of November 18, 2021. At the plea hearing on September 15, 2022, the parties stipulated that there was a factual basis for the plea.
On August 25, 2021, at about 5:00 a.m., Mendoza, who had been having a romantic relationship with C.M., was following her car with his truck and aggressively tailgating her vehicle. C.M.'s sister, A.A., was in C.M.'s car at the time of the incident. Mendoza eventually hit C.M.'s car with his truck as she attempted to swerve out of his way. After both vehicles stopped, Mendoza threatened C.M. when she advised she was going to contact law enforcement and left the scene. Police eventually located Mendoza and arrested him.
APPELLATE COURT REVIEW
Mendoza's appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief that summarizes the pertinent facts, raises no issues, and requests this court to review the record independently. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) The opening brief also includes the declaration of appellate counsel indicating Mendoza was advised he could file his own brief with this court. By letter on June 27, 2023, we invited Mendoza to submit additional briefing. To date, he has not done so.
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no evidence of ineffective assistance of counsel or any other arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to Mendoza.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
[*] Before Detjen, Acting P. J., Snauffer, J. and De Santos, J.