Opinion
E073541
02-24-2020
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CARLOS ALONZO FLORES, Defendant and Appellant.
Johanna Pirko, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super.Ct.No. SWF1102550) OPINION APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. F. Paul Dickerson III, Judge. Affirmed. Johanna Pirko, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant and appellant, Carlos Alonzo Flores, pled no contest to one count of committing a lewd act upon a child 14 years of age and 10 or more years younger than defendant. (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (c)(1).) Defendant thereafter filed a petition to dismiss his conviction pursuant to Penal Code section 1203.4, which the court denied.
After defendant filed a notice of appeal, 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 and one potentially arguable issue: whether the court abused its discretion in denying defendant's petition for dismissal. We affirm.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On September 8, 2009, the People charged defendant in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County by felony complaint with two counts of committing lewd acts upon a child 14 years of age and 10 or more years younger than defendant. (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (c)(1), counts 1 & 2). On November 4, 2009, the matter was transferred to the Superior Court of Riverside County, where defendant pled no contest to count 1. The court found the factual basis for the plea based upon the complaint. Pursuant to the plea agreement, the court granted defendant formal probation for a term of 36 months.
On May 10, 2013, over the People's objection, the court granted defendant's Penal Code section 17, subdivision (b) motion to reduce his offense from a felony to a misdemeanor based in part on the fact that defendant had not incurred any violations of his probation. On May 10, 2019, defendant filed a petition to dismiss his conviction pursuant to section 1203.4. On June 19, 2019, the court denied the petition.
II. DISCUSSION
We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done. Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have independently reviewed the record for potential error and find no arguable issues.
III. DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
McKINSTER
J. We concur: RAMIREZ
P. J. MILLER
J.