Opinion
D072552
06-08-2018
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. KEITH EVAN RATNER, Defendant and Appellant.
Lynelle K. Hee, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. SCN364895) APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Carlos O. Armour, Judge. Affirmed. Lynelle K. Hee, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Keith Evan Ratner entered into a plea agreement under which he pleaded guilty to one count of driving with a blood alcohol content in excess of .08 percent causing injury (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (b)). Ratner admitted he had a blood alcohol content in excess of .15 percent (Veh. Code, § 23578) and admitted personally causing great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 1192.7, subd. (c)(8)). The parties stipulated to an upper term of three years in prison and the remaining charges and allegations were dismissed. Ratner was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement.
Ratner filed a timely notice of appeal, but did not obtain a certificate of probable cause. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5.)
Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), indicating she has been unable to identify any arguable issue for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered Ratner the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal, but he has not responded.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Since this appeal arises from a plea agreement with a stipulated sentence, we simply note that Ratner pleaded guilty to driving a vehicle with a blood alcohol level of .15 percent or higher which resulted in great bodily injury to more than one person.
DISCUSSION
As we have noted, appellate counsel has advised she is unable to identify any arguable issue for reversal on appeal. She asks this court to review the record for error, citing Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders). In order to assist the court in its review of the record, and in compliance with Anders, counsel has identified the following possible, but not arguable issue:
Whether Ratner made a voluntary, knowing and intelligent decision to plead guilty.
We have reviewed the entire record pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738. We have not identified any arguable issue for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Ratner on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
HUFFMAN, Acting P. J. WE CONCUR: AARON, J. IRION, J.