From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Elizarraras

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division
Feb 10, 2011
No. E051261 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 10, 2011)

Opinion

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County No. FVI901542. Jules E. Fleuret, Judge.

Neil Auwarter, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


OPINION

MILLER J.

In January 2010, the girlfriend of defendant Refugio Elizarraras testified defendant had been living with her, in Victorville, for approximately four years. When defendant applied for a job, the employer performed a background check and discovered defendant was not in compliance with sexual offender registration laws. The employer notified law enforcement. A law enforcement officer verified defendant was required to register as a sexual offender. The City of Victorville had no record of defendant being registered in the city as a sexual offender. The law enforcement officer spoke to defendant on July 9, 2009. Defendant admitted he had lived in Victorville for approximately three years. Defendant said he knew he was supposed to register, but had not done so due to complacency.

The foregoing facts are taken from the reporter’s transcript of the preliminary hearing.

Defendant was charged with three counts of failing to register as a sexual offender-one count for each of the three years. (Pen. Code, § 290.012, subd. (a).) The information further alleged that defendant suffered two prior strike convictions (Pen. Code, §§ 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d), 67, subds. (b)-(i)) and three prior convictions for which he served prison terms (Pen. Code, 667.5, subd. (b)).

On May 7, 2010, per a plea agreement, defendant sought to (1) enter a plea of guilty to one count of failing to register as a sexual offender, and (2) admit he suffered one prior strike conviction and one prior conviction for which he served a prison term). In exchange, the prosecutor agreed to defendant serving a prison sentence of five years. The five-year sentence was comprised of a midterm of two years for the substantive offense, doubled to four years for the prior strike, plus one additional year for the prison prior.

At the hearing, defendant stated he understood the charges against him. Defendant stated he discussed the penalties and consequences of his plea with his attorney, which were included on a pre-printed form; and defendant stated he understood those penalties and consequences. Defendant further stated he had enough time with his attorney to talk about pleading guilty to the charge and admitting the prior offenses. Defendant stated he read through a list of his constitutional rights with his attorney, he understood those rights, and he agreed to waive those rights so that his plea could be entered.

Defendant pled guilty to failing to register as a sexual offender. Defendant admitted suffering one prior strike conviction and one prior conviction for which he served a prison term. Defendant and his trial attorney waived arraignment for sentencing. The trial court sentenced defendant to state prison for a term of five years, per the plea agreement. Per the agreement, the trial court informed defendant that his commitment to state prison would be followed by a parole term of three to four years. Defendant said he understood his parole rights. The record on appeal does not include a certificate of probable cause. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5.)

We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. 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 potential arguable issues, 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 independently examined the entire record and have determined that no arguable issues exist. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 113-119; People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: McKINSTER Acting P. J., RICHLI J.


Summaries of

People v. Elizarraras

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division
Feb 10, 2011
No. E051261 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 10, 2011)
Case details for

People v. Elizarraras

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. REFUGIO ELIZARRARAS, Defendant…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division

Date published: Feb 10, 2011

Citations

No. E051261 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 10, 2011)