From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Reina

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division
Oct 15, 2007
No. E042814 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 15, 2007)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ELI REINA, Defendant and Appellant. E042814 California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Second Division October 15, 2007

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Michael M. Dest, Judge, Super.Ct. No. FSB052601.

Richard L. Schwartzberg, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

RAMIREZ, P.J.

On January 25, 2006, in case No. FSB052601, pursuant to Penal Code section 1192.7, defendant, represented by counsel, pled guilty to a violation of section 211, first degree residential robbery. In accordance with the negotiated disposition the remaining charges and special allegations were dismissed and stricken on motion of the district attorney and in the interests of justice. (§ 1385.) Defendant’s sentencing hearing was continued on a Cruz waiver and defendant was released on his own recognizance.

All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.

People v. Cruz (1988) 44 Cal.3d 1247, 1254.

Defendant failed to appear for his sentencing hearing and the matter was continued for defendant to meet with his probation officer. Once again, defendant failed to appear and a bench warrant was issued for his arrest.

Thereafter, when defendant appeared in court, he was again represented by counsel, and after admitting that his violated the Cruz waiver, he was committed to state prison for four years less custody credits.

Statement of Facts

On October 16, 2006, defendant went to the victim’s residence demanding repayment of a debt. After a fight, defendant “pulled out” a gun, entered the residence and assaulted the victim. After forcing the residents to the backyard, defendant demanded the keys to a truck. Thereafter, defendant left with the truck.

Defendant appealed, and upon his request this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493] setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record.

We offered the defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.

We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.

Disposition

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: McKINSTER, J., GAUT, J.


Summaries of

People v. Reina

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division
Oct 15, 2007
No. E042814 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 15, 2007)
Case details for

People v. Reina

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ELI REINA, Defendant and…

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

Date published: Oct 15, 2007

Citations

No. E042814 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 15, 2007)