From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Parchman

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
Jul 10, 2007
No. D050096 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 10, 2007)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CARL W. PARCHMAN, Defendant and Appellant. D050096 California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, First Division July 10, 2007

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Allan J. Preckel, Judge., Super. Ct. No. SCE258433.

IRION, J.

After the trial court denied a motion to substitute counsel (People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118), granted a later motion to substitute counsel, denied a motion to continue trial and granted and denied various in limine motions, the court certified Carl W. Parchman for a mental competency evaluation. The court found Parchman competent to stand trial and granted the People's request to file a second amendment to the information adding a charge of making a criminal threat. (Pen. Code, § 422.) The court denied Parchman's motion to dismiss the amended charge and Parchman entered negotiated guilty pleas to robbery (§ 211) and petty theft with a prior theft conviction (§§ 666/484, 488). Parchman admitted serving a prior prison term (§§ 667.5 subd. (b), 668). During Parchman's plea colloquy, the court informed him that the maximum sentence it would impose was three years in prison. The court said it also could, depending on the probation report at the proceedings at sentencing, impose a two-year sentence and strike the prior prison term allegation. The court said it would look "real hard" to see if a two-year sentence was appropriate. At the sentencing hearing the court said it had closely examined the case and concluded it could not impose a two-year sentence. Instead, the court sentenced Parchman to prison for the three-year middle term for robbery. It stayed sentence on the conviction of petty theft with a prior theft conviction. (Pen. Code, § 654.) The court denied a certificate of probable cause. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b).)

All statutory references are to the Penal Code.

Parchman's appellate counsel advised this court that the trial court subsequently struck the conviction of petty theft with a prior theft conviction.

FACTS

Viewing the record in the light most favorable to the judgment below (People v. Johnson (1980) 26 Cal.3d 557, 576), the following occurred: On January 31, 2006, Parchman entered a 7-11 store in El Cajon and took a bag of sunflower seeds without paying. A store employee followed him out and asked why he stole from the store. Parchman pulled a knife and threatened the employee's life. Because Parchman entered guilty pleas, he cannot challenge the facts underlying the convictions. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5; People v. Martin (1973) 9 Cal.3d 687, 693.) We need not recite the facts in greater detail.

DISCUSSION

Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief setting forth the evidence in the superior court. Counsel presents no argument for reversal but asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel refers to as a possible but not arguable issue whether the sentence complied with the plea agreement.

We granted Parchman permission to file a brief on his own behalf and granted a request to augment the record with a reporter's transcript of the competency hearing. Parchman has not responded. A review of the entire record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, including the possible issues referred to pursuant to Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issue. Competent counsel has represented Parchman on this appeal.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

WE CONCUR: McCONNELL, P. J., McDONALD, J.


Summaries of

People v. Parchman

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
Jul 10, 2007
No. D050096 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 10, 2007)
Case details for

People v. Parchman

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CARL W. PARCHMAN, Defendant and…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division

Date published: Jul 10, 2007

Citations

No. D050096 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 10, 2007)