From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Pierce

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
Feb 6, 2012
F062590 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 6, 2012)

Opinion

F062590

02-06-2012

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DARNELL LUCIFER PIERCE, Defendant and Appellant.

Ron Boyer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. SF016056A)


OPINION


THE COURT

Before Levy, Acting P.J., Poochigian, J., and Franson, J.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Judith K. Dulcich, Judge.

Ron Boyer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Appellant, Darnell Lucifer Pierce, appeals from a judgment entered after he pled no contest to felony indecent exposure (Pen. Code, § 314, subd.1). Following independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441, we affirm.

FACTS

Pierce was an inmate at Wasco State Prison. On October 20, 2010, at approximately 6:05 p.m., a female correctional officer observed Pierce masturbating while lying on a bunk bed in his cell. When the officer approached Pierce's cell, Pierce ceased masturbating and covered himself with a blanket.

On November 16, 2010, at approximately 10:30 a.m., Pierce was standing by his cell door being interviewed by a female psych technician when he stepped back from the door exposing his penis, which he was holding in his hand.

On November 10, 2010, at approximately 10:00 a.m., a female psychologist was performing mental health exams when she noticed Pierce wave his right arm in order to get her attention. When the psychologist looked at Pierce she saw him standing at the door of his cell masturbating.

On March 22, 2011, the district attorney filed an information charging Pierce with three counts of felony indecent exposure. The complaint also alleged three prior prison term enhancements (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)).

On April 27, 2011, Pierce pled to one count of indecent exposure in exchange for the dismissal of the remaining counts and enhancements and an indicated sentence of 16 months. The prosecutor also agreed not to file an uncharged indecent exposure offense.

On May 25, 2011, the court denied Pierce's motion to award him presentence custody credit because during the time he was incarcerated he was serving time for a parole violation on an unrelated offense. The court then sentenced Pierce in accord with his plea bargain to the mitigated term of 16 months.

Pierce's appellate counsel has filed a brief which summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Pierce has not responded to this court's invitation to submit additional briefing.

Following an independent review of the record we find that no reasonably arguable factual or legal issues exist.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Pierce

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
Feb 6, 2012
F062590 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 6, 2012)
Case details for

People v. Pierce

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DARNELL LUCIFER PIERCE, Defendant…

Court:COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

Date published: Feb 6, 2012

Citations

F062590 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 6, 2012)