Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. FF408681
Premo, J.
A consolidated information charged defendant Michael Redmond with 24 counts of theft-related crimes, most of which were committed in 2004 and 2005. Defendant pleaded no contest to 12 of the counts, admitted that three of the crimes had been committed while he was out on bail (Pen. Code, § 12022.1), and agreed that the remaining crimes could be considered in sentencing. Defendant’s plea was in exchange for the promise of a sentence no longer than eight years and eight months in state prison. The trial court imposed the maximum agreed-upon sentence and ordered defendant to pay restitution to six of his victims. Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal. He did not obtain a certificate of probable cause. (§ 1237.5.)
Further unspecified code references are to the Penal Code.
We appointed counsel to represent defendant in this court. Appointed counsel filed an opening brief which states the case and the facts but raises no specific issues. We notified defendant of his right to submit written argument in his own behalf within 30 days. That period has elapsed and we have received no written argument from defendant.
Because this matter was resolved by plea, we take our recitation of the facts from the probation report and the facts submitted at the sentencing hearing.
Since the details of the crimes are not pertinent to our analysis of this appeal, we summarize them very briefly.
During the period between May 2004 and September 2005, defendant issued a series of checks for which he had insufficient funds. He cashed a check for $6,500 at Money Market Check Cashing in Gilroy, he deposited a check for $5,000 into his account at South Valley Bank, and he gave worthless checks to at least three potential landlords as deposits or rent for their residential properties. Defendant lived in the properties without paying rent until eviction proceedings induced him to move. When he did, he took some of the landlords’ property with him and vandalized that which he left behind. Defendant rented a vehicle from Dollar-Rent-A-Car and failed to return it when due. When his credit card was declined, the company reported the vehicle as stolen. He agreed to purchase a car from a private party, promising to take over the payments, but he never did. In 2003, he made unauthorized use of his employer’s federal identification number to purchase three cell phones that cost around $3,000.
In September and October 2005, defendant failed to appear in court during a time he was released on bail. Police investigating a complaint against defendant soon learned that defendant had moved to Arizona. A warrant was issued for his arrest. On or about October 17, 2005, he was taken into custody in Arizona and returned to California on December 21, 2005.
II. SENTENCING
The 12 counts to which defendant pleaded guilty consisted of two counts of grand theft (§§ 484, 487, subd. (a)), three counts of felony vandalism (§ 594, subds. (a), (b)(1)), four counts of issuing a check without sufficient funds (§ 476a), one count of using personal identifying information without authorization (§ 530.5, subd. (a)), one count of embezzlement by a bailee, tenant, or lodger (§§ 507, 487), and one count of failure to appear while released on bail (§ 1320.5). The punishment prescribed for all 12 felonies is the same (16 months, 2 years or 3 years). In sentencing defendant, the trial court struck the on-bail enhancements in the interests of justice (§ 1385), sentenced defendant to the mitigated term for one count of grand theft, and added one-third of the middle term for the 11 remaining counts to be served consecutively. The total sentence imposed equals the agreed-upon eight years and eight months. Custody credits were such that the base term and the first consecutive term were deemed served.
The court ordered defendant to pay restitution of $6,007 to Money Market Check Cashing, $5,566.77 to South Valley Bank, $15,000 to Daryle Smith, $8,623.20 to AirZip, $10,654.80 to Dollar-Rent-A-Car, and $22,888 to Robert Kyle. Defendant admitted that he owed these amounts to these victims. The court ordered the minimum restitution fund fine of $200 (§ 1202.4) and imposed and suspended a parole revocation fine in the same amount (§ 1202.45).
III. DISCUSSION
Defendant requested but did not receive a certificate of probable cause, which is required by section 1237.5 when a defendant seeks to appeal from a judgment entered following a guilty or no contest plea. Accordingly, the appeal is inoperative insofar as it might challenge constitutional, jurisdictional, or other grounds going to the legality of the proceedings. (§ 1237.5, subd. (a).) The certificate is not required when the notice of appeal states that it is based upon the denial of a motion to suppress evidence under section 1538.5 or grounds that arose after entry of the plea and do not affect the plea’s validity. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b)(4).) Defendant’s notice of appeal states that the appeal is based upon the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea and, therefore, the appeal is operative as to those matters. We have reviewed the whole record accordingly, pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, and, having done so, we conclude that there is no arguable issue on appeal.
IV. DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
WE CONCUR: Rushing, P.J., Elia, J.