Opinion
A101771.
11-19-2003
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ROBERT EARL HAWKINS, Defendant and Appellant.
Robert Hawkins appeals from a judgment of conviction entered upon a plea of nolo contendere. Appellants court-appointed counsel has briefed no issues and asks this court to review the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.
An information filed in San Mateo County Superior Court charged appellant with auto burglary (Pen. Code, §§ 459, 460, subd. (b)), receiving stolen property (§ 496, subd. (a)), auto theft (Veh. Code, § 10851) and two misdemeanors: possession of drug paraphernalia (Health & Saf. Code, § 11364) and possession of burglars tools (§ 466). The information further alleged that appellant served nine prior prison terms, each a sentencing enhancement (§ 667.5, subd. (b)), suffered prior convictions for auto theft (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)) bringing the present count of the same offense within the sentencing provisions of section 666.5, and suffered a strike (§ 1170.12).
Appellant pleaded nolo contendere to auto burglary (§§ 459, 460, subd. (b)) and auto theft (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)) while admitting all the special allegations (§§ 666.5, 667.5, subd. (b), 1170.12) with the understanding that the court would sentence him to a maximum of 11 years and 4 months in state prison.
The court selected auto theft (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)) as the principal term and sentenced appellant to the middle term of three years in state prison. The court then doubled the sentence to six years because of appellants admitted strike (§ 1170.12). The court sentenced appellant to a consecutive eight months, or one-third the middle term, for auto burglary (§§ 459, 460, subd. (b)) and then doubled this subordinate term to one year and four months because of appellants strike (§ 1170.12). The court imposed a single one-year enhancement for having served a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). Thus, the aggregate term totaled eight years and four months. The court granted appellant 369 days total presentence credit and ordered him to pay a $200 restitution fine.
Before appellant entered his plea, the court advised him of the constitutional rights he would be waiving and the direct consequences of his plea. Appellant expressly waived his constitutional rights and knowingly and voluntarily pleaded nolo contendere and admitted the special allegations.
Appellant was represented by counsel throughout the proceedings.
There was no sentencing error.
There are no issues that require further briefing.
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: Lambden, J., Ruvolo, J. --------------- Notes: All further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.