Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
San Mateo County Super. Ct. No. SC070189A
Marchiano, P.J.
After agreeing to a plea agreement, defendant Luis Perez Parga appeals from a judgment of conviction and a sentence of two years to state prison after pleading no contest to a charge of violating Penal Code section 212.5, subdivision (c), robbery, and admitting use of a deadly or dangerous weapon in violation of Penal Code section 12022, subdivision (b). Defendant filed a notice of appeal.
Defendant’s counsel filed an opening brief that raises no issues and asks this court for an independent review pursuant to People v.Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Defendant was notified of his right to file a supplementary brief and has not done so. After independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no arguable issues to brief and affirm the judgment.
Statement of Facts
The probation report indicates the robbery victim was lured to a location where defendant struck him on the head and knocked him to the ground. At knifepoint, defendant stole $180, a cell phone, and the victim’s identification. Defendant tied the victim’s hands, put a rag inside his mouth and threatened to shoot the victim.
Proceedings
The information charged defendant with two serious felonies and a misdemeanor violation of a court order. After negotiations with the assistance of counsel, defendant executed a change of plea and waiver of constitutional rights form in which he agreed to plead to count one with a top of two years in prison in return for avoiding a possible six-year term if found guilty of all of the charges. The court carefully questioned defendant before accepting the change of plea. At the sentencing hearing, defendant’s counsel argued for probation and submitted certificates of completion of jail rehabilitative programs and letters of acceptance from Delancey Street, Jericho Project, and The Salvation Army as alternatives to imprisonment. The court considered factors in mitigation, defendant’s past record, and the circumstances of the crime and sentenced defendant to two years in state prison.
Discussion
By pleading no contest defendant admitted the sufficiency of the evidence establishing the crime and is not entitled to a review of any issue that goes to the question of guilt or innocence. (People v. Hunter (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 37, 42.) In addition, Penal Code section 1237.5 and California Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b), bar appeals following a plea of no contest except when the issues raised by the appeal are either the validity of a denial of a motion to suppress evidence or relate to matters arising after the entry of the plea that do not affect the plea’s validity, or the defendant sought and received a certificate of probable cause. (People v. De Vaughn (1977) 18 Cal.3d 889, 895.) Defendant did not obtain a certificate of probable cause.
The case did not involve evidence subject to a motion to dismiss. The court properly exercised its discretion in imposing the sentence. Defendant was represented by counsel at all stages of the proceedings. There were no errors in the proceedings, including the sentencing.
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: Margulies, J., Dondero, J.