Opinion
D070937
01-23-2017
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LORENZO HAYNES, Defendant and Appellant.
Raquel Cohen, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. SCE360398) APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Daniel B. Goldstein, Judge. Affirmed. Raquel Cohen, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Lorenzo Haynes entered into a plea agreement under which he pleaded guilty to one count of felony vandalism (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (a)(b)(1)). The remaining charges were dismissed and the parties stipulated to a 16-month term, to be served concurrently with the sentence in another case.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified.
Prior to sentencing, Haynes asked to withdraw his guilty plea and requested that his counsel be replaced. The court then held a hearing under People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 (Marsden). After hearing from Haynes, the court denied both requests. Haynes was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement. Haynes filed a timely notice of appeal and obtained a certificate of probable cause. (§ 1237.5.)
Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), indicating she has not been able to identify any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered Haynes the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal but he has not responded.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The current offense took place on March 20, 2016. At about 2:00 a.m. Haynes damaged the car of his former girlfriend. He broke several windows and scratched the paint. Haynes fled when the victim's father came out of the house to confront him. Later, the victim's car was set on fire.
The facts of the offense are taken from the probation officer's report. --------
DISCUSSION
As we have noted, counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436. Although counsel has not identified any arguable issues for reversal on appeal, counsel has identified two possible issues to assist this court in its review of the record for error. (Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders).) The possible issues presented are:
1. Whether the trial court properly denied Haynes's request to withdraw his guilty plea.
2. Whether the court properly denied the Marsden motion.
We have reviewed the entire record as mandated by Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738. We have not discovered any reasonably arguable issue for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Haynes on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
/s/_________
HUFFMAN, J. WE CONCUR: /s/_________
McCONNELL, P. J. /s/_________
IRION, J.