Opinion
F073224
03-10-2017
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DOUGLAS WAYNE CLOPTON, Defendant and Appellant.
Stephanie L. Gunther, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Fresno Super. Ct. No. F15907972)
OPINION
THE COURT APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. David A. Gottlieb, Judge. Stephanie L. Gunther, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Before Levy, Acting P.J., Poochigian, J. and Smith, J.
-ooOoo-
Douglas Wayne Clopton entered into a plea agreement, which resulted in conviction on two misdemeanor charges. Appellate counsel could not identify any arguable issues. We affirm the judgment.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY
The complaint charged defendant/appellant Douglas Wayne Clopton with second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211), attempted kidnapping (§§ 664 & 207, subd. (a)), misdemeanor battery (§ 243, subd. (e)(1)), and misdemeanor possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)). Defendant's opening brief indicates all of the charges, except for the possession count, arose out of a confrontation he had with his ex-girlfriend when he encountered her on the street. When he was arrested, police found methamphetamine in his possession resulting in the last count.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise stated. --------
One week after the arraignment, defendant entered into a plea agreement wherein he agreed to plead guilty (or no contest) to the two misdemeanor charges. The two felony charges were to be dismissed, and the parties agreed he would be placed on formal probation. Defendant signed a change or plea form, which advised him of his constitutional rights and the consequences of his plea. Defendant initialed and signed the form in the appropriate locations.
The trial court confirmed defendant had sufficient time to discuss the matter with his attorney, defendant had signed and initialed the plea form, and no threats were made to induce him to enter into the plea. The trial court advised defendant of the immigration consequences of his plea. It advised defendant of his constitutional rights and obtained the waiver of those rights. The trial court then accepted defendant's no contest plea to the two counts. The remaining counts were dismissed.
Defendant waived his right to a probation report and the matter proceeded directly to sentencing. The trial court suspended imposition of sentence, placed defendant on formal probation, including 21 days in custody, and ordered him to participate in a substance abuse treatment program. Defendant received 21 days credit for time served.
DISCUSSION
Appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 asserting that after reviewing the record she could not identify any arguable issues in the case. By letter dated May 5, 2016, we invited defendant to inform this court of any issues he wished us to address. Defendant did not respond to our letter.
We agree with appellate counsel there are no arguable issues in this case. Defendant entered into a plea agreement in the early stages of the case. The parties complied with the terms of the plea agreement, and the trial court imposed the sentence on which the parties agreed. Defendant was informed of and waived his rights both orally and in the plea form.
Defendant's notice of appeal states he is appealing from a denial of his motion to suppress, yet no such motion was made in this matter. Defendant claimed on the notice that his ex-girlfriend was less than honest with the police. However, he pled to two misdemeanor charges, and his plea is an admission to each of the elements of the crimes. A plea of no contest "is a 'conclusive admission of guilt' [citation], and constitutes a conviction ' "within the ordinary as well as the technical meaning of the word ...." ' [Citations.]" (People v. Jones (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1087, 1093-1094.) " 'A plea of guilty admits every element of the offense charged ..., all allegations and factors comprising the charge contained in the pleading....' [Citation.] The legal effect of a no contest plea is the same. [Citation.]" (People v. Palacios (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 252, 257-258.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.