Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County No. VA104125 Leland H. Tipton, Judge.
Murray A. Rosenberg, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
MALLANO, P. J.
Defendant Robbie Blajos entered a negotiated plea of no contest to attempted murder and second degree robbery. No preliminary hearing was conducted, but the amended felony complaint alleged that on January 17, 2008, Blajos and two accomplices robbed Dee Pak Aggerwal and attempted to murder Leonardo Calderon. Testimony elicited from Blajos to establish a factual basis for the plea revealed that his accomplice Gomez handed guns to Blajos and accomplice Duran and told them to rob two men on the street. The probation report indicates that Blajos pointed a gun at one of the men and took his wallet and mobile phone. The probation report further indicates that earlier on the same night, Blajos and Duran approached three men who were walking and robbed at least one of them at knifepoint. Blajos then slashed the knife toward the robbery victim’s neck, and cut the victim’s thumb.
After his plea of no contest, Blajos retained private counsel and unsuccessfully moved to withdraw his plea on the ground of ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing at which Blajos and his former attorney testified. The court denied the motion and sentenced Blajos to 22 years in prison, as provided in the plea agreement.
Blajos obtained a certificate of probable cause and filed a timely appeal. We appointed counsel to represent Blajos on appeal. After examining the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues and asking this court to independently review the record. On October 23, 2009, we advised Blajos he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. To date, we have received no response.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that Blajos’s attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 109–110; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: ROTHSCHILD J., CHANEY J.