Opinion
D075611
09-16-2019
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DOUGLAS W. REITER, Defendant and Appellant.
Russell S. Babcock, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. SCN370730) APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Blaine K. Bowman, Judge. Affirmed. Russell S. Babcock, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Douglas W. Reiter pleaded guilty to three counts of lewd acts upon a child (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a)) as part of a plea agreement. Under that agreement, the parties stipulated that Reiter would receive a 10-year prison sentence. The remaining charges were dismissed. Five months later Reiter filed a motion to withdraw his guilty pleas. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied the motion. Reiter was sentenced to a 10-year term as stipulated in the plea agreement. The court stayed all fines and fees pending a hearing on Reiter's ability to pay. Reiter was ordered to register as a sex offender under section 290.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified. --------
Reiter filed a timely notice of appeal and obtained a certificate of probable cause. (§ 1237.5).
Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), indicating he has not been able to identify any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered Reiter the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal, but he has not responded.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The transcript of the preliminary hearing shows that when the victim, P.C., was six and seven years-old Reiter had her masturbate him on at least six occasions.
DISCUSSION
As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436. Counsel asks this court to review the record for error. To assist the court in its review and in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders) counsel has identified the following issue that he considered in his evaluation of the record: Did the trial court abuse its discretion in denying Reiter's motion to withdraw his guilty pleas.
We have reviewed the entire record as required by Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Reiter in this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
HUFFMAN, J. WE CONCUR: BENKE, Acting P. J. O'ROURKE, J.