Opinion
D059242 Super. Ct. No. SCD230349
01-11-2012
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DONALD E. GARRETT, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
APPEAL from a judgment and an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Jeffrey F. Fraser, Judge. Affirmed.
This appeal is taken from a judgment of the superior court based on Donald Garrett's guilty plea to one count of possessing drug paraphernalia and proceeds in accordance with People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Finding no reasonably arguable appellate issue, we affirm the judgment.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
While on probation, Garrett was arrested and charged with one count each of possession of a controlled substance, destroying or concealing documentary evidence and possession of drug paraphernalia. The information alleged that Garrett had been previously convicted of two or more felonies, had served three prison priors and had a strike prior. Although Garrett originally pled not guilty to the offenses, he later agreed to plead guilty to the paraphernalia count in exchange for a dismissal of the remaining counts and allegations.
The plea agreement advised Garrett of his constitutional rights to a speedy trial by jury, to confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him, to remain silent and to present evidence in his defense and he agreed to waive those rights. It also advised him of the penal consequences of his plea, including that (1) the maximum sentence for the charges to which he was pleading was six months, (2) he might be required to pay a fine of up to $1,000, (3) any current parole or probation might be revoked, and (4) if he was not a U.S. citizen, his plea might result in his deportation.
With the agreement of his counsel, Garrett entered into the plea, stipulated that on October 20, 2010 he had possessed drug paraphernalia used for smoking a controlled substance and admitted that this violated the terms of his probation in another criminal case. The court accepted the plea and, on the prosecutor's motion, dismissed the remaining charges and allegations. It immediately sentenced Garrett, placing him on three years' summary probation and ordering him to pay a $100 restitution fine, a $40 court security fee and a $30 criminal conviction assessment. Garrett appeals.
Garrett's appellate counsel has filed a brief indicating that he has been unable to identify any argument for reversal and asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende; we invited Garrett to file a brief on his own behalf. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel's brief identifies the following issues as possible, but not arguable, on appeal:
1. Was Garrett's guilty plea constitutionally valid?
2. Was there a proper factual basis for the plea?
3. Did the court abuse its discretion in rendering judgment?
DISCUSSION
We have reviewed the record in accordance with Wende and Anders and not found any reasonably arguable appellate issues. Garrett has been competently represented by counsel on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
_________
O'ROURKE, J.
WE CONCUR:
_________
McCONNELL, P. J.
_________
McDONALD, J.