Opinion
F074076
08-24-2017
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. KAYLA MICHELLE THOMAS, Defendant and Appellant.
William G. Holzer, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. Nos. SF018266B, SF018460A )
OPINION
THE COURT APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Judith K. Dulcich, Judge. William G. Holzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Before Franson, Acting P.J., Smith, J., and Meehan, J.
-ooOoo-
Appellant Kayla Michelle Thomas pled no contest to second degree burglary (Pen. Code, §§ 459, 460, subd. (b)) in case No. SF018266B and to failure to appear (§1320.5) in case No. SF018460A. Thomas also admitted an on bail enhancement (§ 12022.1) in case No. SF018460A.
All statutory references are to the Penal Code.
Following independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On January 13, 2014, Paula Camp reported to the Kern County Sheriff's Department that when she returned to her residence that day, she noticed a bedroom window was open. Camp checked the house and discovered several items missing, including a 32-inch television, jewelry, tools, coins, and two firearms.
On August 18, 2014, a deputy received information that Thomas and codefendant, Juan Castilleja, were involved in the burglary. During a subsequent contact with Thomas, she admitted stealing various items from Camp's residence (case No. SF018266B).
On July 29, 2015, the Kern County District Attorney filed a complaint in case No. SF018266B that, in pertinent part, charged Thomas with second degree burglary.
On December 28, 2015, Thomas failed to appear for a preliminary hearing in that matter (case No. SF018460A).
On February 12, 2016, the district attorney filed a complaint in case No. SF018460A charging Thomas with failure to appear and an on bail enhancement.
On March 7, 2016, Thomas pled no contest to second degree burglary in case No. SF018266B and to failure to appear in case No. SF018460A and she admitted the on bail enhancement in the latter case in exchange for a grant of probation conditioned on Thomas serving a year in custody.
Thomas executed a change of plea form for each case. The forms each contained a clause that provided: "I understand that the conditional plea I am entering here today is not binding on the judge who sentences me. I understand that if the judge disapproves of this plea and its conditions, I will be permitted to withdraw my plea, my not guilty plea(s) will be reentered, all dismissed charges and cases will be reinstated, and my case will then be scheduled for a preliminary hearing." --------
After the court took Thomas's plea, defense counsel asked the court to schedule Thomas's sentencing hearing two months from that date. Over the district attorney's objection, the court set Thomas's sentencing hearing for April 19, 2016. However, the court admonished her that if she failed to appear on that date or committed "[a] new law violation, that probation sentence [was] off the table." The court asked if she understood those terms and Thomas acknowledged she did.
On April 19, 2016, Thomas failed to appear at her sentencing hearing and the court issued a warrant for her arrest.
On April 26, 2016, Thomas was arrested.
On May 25, 2016, the court, without objection, sentenced Thomas to an aggregate, split local term of four years eight months with two years in custody and the remainder on mandatory supervision. Thomas did not move to withdraw her plea during the hearing.
Thomas's appellate counsel has filed a brief that summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Thomas has not responded to this court's invitation to submit additional briefing.
Following an independent review of the record, we find that no reasonably arguable factual or legal issues exist.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.