Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County, Super. Ct. No. 1097079. John G. Whiteside, Judge.
Eleanor M. Kraft, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
Before Levy, Acting P.J., Dawson, J., Kane, J.
During the week of August 20, 2005, James Fisher took his 2003 Ford truck to Country Ford for warranty work. A few days later, Fisher was informed his truck was ready to be picked up. However, when Fisher went to the dealership the truck was gone.
In August 2005, Ceres Police Officer Jeremy Caron and Ceres Detective Larry Meyer were assigned to the Auto Theft Task Force. On August 25, 2005, Caron saw Fisher’s stolen truck parked at an apartment complex in Ceres. Caron set up a perimeter around the truck and requested assistance from other members of the task force as he watched the truck from his unmarked police car. Detective Meyer watched the truck from his unmarked police truck. Caron soon saw Davidson walk a bicycle to the truck and place it in the back. Davidson got in the truck, backed out of his parking spot, but was unable to drive forward because Meyer placed his truck in front of the stolen truck. Caron attempted to box in the stolen truck by placing his car behind it but had to move to avoid a collision when Davidson backed up again. Davidson drove through the complex’s parking lot and a grass area as he made his way to the street. Caron and Meyer activated their emergency lights when they attempted to box Davidson in and activated their sirens when Davidson drove off.
Caron and Meyer were both dressed in plain clothes but each wore a black raid vest that said Police on the front and back.
Ceres Police Officer Larry Reeves followed Davidson in a marked patrol car with his emergency lights and siren activated as Davidson drove on city streets and into a long driveway belonging to a retirement home. Davidson stopped the truck by the side of the retirement home and ran inside. He was taken into custody at gunpoint as he hid under a table. During the chase, Davidson turned in front of Reeves requiring the officer to brake abruptly to avoid colliding with him. Davidson also failed to stop at three stop signs, and he accelerated to 50 miles per hour on the driveway of the assisted living facility.
During a post-arrest interview, Caron asked Davidson why he was driving a stolen truck. Davidson replied, in pertinent part, that he was “more, like, borrowing the vehicle” and intended to return it in a few days. Davidson also stated that he did not stop because he was caught by surprise and did not immediately recognize the officers’ vehicles as police vehicles until he saw the red light. He also admitted driving without regard for public safety because “he was just being stupid,” and that he got the truck from “the car lot.”
Following a preliminary hearing, the district attorney filed an information on February 7, 2006, charging Davidson with vehicle theft (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), evading a police officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)), and 10 prior prison term enhancements (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). The information also alleged that Davidson had three prior vehicle theft convictions.
On March 14, 2006, the court suspended criminal proceedings and ordered Davidson evaluated to determine his competency to stand trial.
On March 22, 2006, Dr. Philip Trompetter evaluated Davidson and concluded he was competent to stand trial.
On September 19, 2006, a jury convicted Davidson of vehicle theft and evading a police officer.
On September 20, 2006, Davidson admitted four prior prison term enhancements and the allegations that he had three prior vehicle theft convictions.
On October 18, 2006, the court sentenced Davidson to an aggregate term of seven years eight months: the middle term of three years on his vehicle theft conviction, a consecutive eight-month term (one-third the middle term of three years) on his evading a police officer conviction, and four one-year prior prison term enhancements.
Davidson’s appellate counsel has filed a brief which summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Davidson has not responded to this court’s invitation to submit additional briefing.
Following independent review of the record we find that no reasonably arguable factual or legal issues exist.
The judgment is affirmed.