Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. John Monterosso, Judge. Super.Ct.No. SWF021179.
Neil Auwarter, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
King, J.
The People charged defendant by complaint with two counts of kidnapping (counts 1 & 2—Pen. Code, § 207, subd. (a)) against the same victim on separate dates; two counts of battery upon a cohabitant (counts 3 & 4—§ 243, subd. (e)) occurring on separate dates against the same victim as in counts 1 and 2; and alleged defendant had incurred one prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subd. (c) & (e), 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)) and three prior prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). On January 8, 2008, the People moved in open court to amend the complaint by adding a count 5 offense, alleging defendant had committed false imprisonment (§ 236) against the same victim and on the same date as alleged in the count 1 offense. The court granted the People’s motion after defense counsel expressly stated it had no objection.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
Thereafter, defendant pled guilty to the count 5 offense and admitted the prior strike and prior prison term enhancements. In return, the remaining counts were dismissed. Defendant’s plea agreement specifically provided that he would be sentenced to an aggregate term of nine years’ imprisonment consisting of the upper term on count 5, three years, doubled pursuant to the prior strike conviction, and three consecutive terms of one year for each of his prior prison terms. The court, in obtaining a factual basis for the plea, inquired of defendant if he pled “guilty to the false imprisonment crime . . . because you did, in fact, commit [that] crime?” Defendant responded in the affirmative. The court then sentenced defendant in accordance with his plea agreement. The court awarded defendant a total of 391 days’ custody credit consisting of 261 days of actual and 130 days of conduct credit.
Defendant appealed without requesting or procuring a certificate of probable cause. Upon his request, this court appointed counsel to represent him. 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 requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record.
We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.
We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
We concur: McKinster, Acting P.J., Gaut J.