Opinion
B189221
12-15-2006
BOREN, P. J., ASHMANN-GERST, J., CHAVEZ, J.
Lavance McNair, also known as Lamar Craven (defendant), appeals from the judgment entered following his negotiated plea of no contest to second degree burglary. (Pen. Code, § 459.) Pursuant to the plea bargain, the trial court sentenced him to an upper three-year term in state prison.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
We summarize the facts and the proceedings.
On August 9, 2004, defendant was inside a Long Beach Wal-Mart Store. A store loss prevention agent observed defendant put $ 350 worth of store merchandise into a shopping cart. Defendant then pushed the shopping cart out of the store without paying for the items inside the cart or going to a cashier. The agent stopped defendant outside and had him return inside the store with the stolen merchandise. The police arrested defendant.
On September 22, 2004, the People filed an information alleging defendant committed burglary and petty theft with a prior conviction at the Wal-Mart store. The information also contained 10 allegations that defendant had served a separate prison term. (§ 667.5, subd. (b).)
At some point, defendant entered a plea of guilty. He later filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus requesting that his plea be set aside. On January 5, 2006, the superior court made that order.
On January 10, 2006, defendant and the prosecutor negotiated an agreement whereby defendant would enter a plea of no contest to count 1 of the information, burglary, in exchange for the promise of a three-year prison term and the dismissal of the petty theft offense and the prison term allegations. Defendant entered his plea, and the trial court sentenced him, as promised. After sentencing, the trial court dismissed the allegations of petty theft and that defendant had served the prior prison terms.
On February 16, 2006, defendant filed a timely notice of appeal.
In the notice of appeal, defendant complained that although the trial court knew that he was taking psychotropic medication, it never held a competency hearing. Defendant made additional claims that "there was inadequacy of defense . . . counsel" and that "the waiver of constitutional protection has been fairly described as the functional equivalent of the waivers embodied in a plea of guilty to an independent criminal charge."
We appointed counsel to represent him on this appeal.
After examination of the record, counsel filed an "Opening Brief" in which no issues were raised. On September 22, 2006, we advised defendant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellants attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
The judgment is affirmed.