Opinion
C082564
01-24-2017
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. THOMAS JOSEPH MELGER, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. 62-144616)
On January 29, 2016, defendant Thomas Joseph Melger obtained identifying information belonging to the Roseville Chapter of the Northern California DeMolay Association and used it to obtain $300.
We incorporate by reference the record of appeal in People v. Melger, C081993.
Defendant pleaded no contest to identity theft (Pen. Code, § 530.5, subd. (a)) and admitted a strike (§§ 1170.12, 667, subd. (b)) and a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). The trial court sentenced defendant to a stipulated term of three years eight months, imposed various fines and fees, ordered victim restitution, and awarded 32 days of presentence credit (16 actual and 16 conduct).
Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. --------
Defendant appeals. His request for a certificate of probable cause was granted.
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief.
Defendant filed a supplemental brief alleging prosecutorial misconduct because there was no probable cause that he committed identity theft in light of Proposition 47, and there was no evidence to support the crime of identity theft.
Defendant is wrong.
Proposition 47, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act, requires "misdemeanors instead of felonies for nonserious, nonviolent crimes . . . unless the defendant has prior convictions for specified violent or serious crimes." (Voter Information Guide, Gen. Elec. (Nov. 4, 2014) text of Prop. 47, § 3, subd. (3), p. 70.) Among the effected crimes are the statutes defining grand theft, forgery, and commercial burglaries during regular business hours. These crimes are misdemeanors unless the amount in question has a value of more than $950. (§§ 490.2, 473, 459.5.) Identity theft is not one of the crimes covered by Proposition 47, and thus has no $950 threshold for potential felony punishment. (See § 530.5, subd. (a).)
Defendant's claim of insufficient evidence is likewise without merit. A plea of guilty or no contest "admits all matters essential to conviction." (People v. DeVaughn (1977) 18 Cal.3d 889, 895.) "A criminal defendant's . . . plea . . . constitutes an admission of every element of the offense charged . . . and concedes the prosecution possesses admissible evidence sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt . . . . [Citation.]" (Ricki J. v. Superior Court (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 783, 792.)
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NICHOLSON, Acting P. J. We concur: HULL, J. HOCH, J.