Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County No. BAF005789, James T. Warren, Judge.
James M. Crawford, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
McKinster, J.
I
BACKGROUND
On October 14, 2007, about 1:36 a.m., police responded to a call of gunshots being fired at the 1000 block of East George Street in Banning. When officers arrived, they spoke to several residents of the neighborhood. The residents stated that they heard a large group of people arguing outside. Later, the residents heard gunshots. Dispatch advised the officer that one of the victims had reported that defendant and appellant, George Ralph Robinson, was the person who had fired the gun during the earlier dispute.
On April 23, 2008, an information charged defendant with discharge of a firearm in a grossly negligent manner under Penal Code section 246.3 (count 1); and felon in possession of a firearm under section 12021, subdivision (a)(1) (count 2). Moreover, pursuant to section 667.5, subdivision (b), the information alleged that defendant suffered a prior conviction for assault with a firearm in violation of section 245, subdivision (a)(2), for which he served a separate term of imprisonment and failed to remain free of prison custody for a period of five years upon being released. The information also alleged that defendant suffered a prior conviction for assault with a firearm under section 245, subdivision (a)(2), a serious felony within the meaning of section 667, subdivision (a). Furthermore, the information alleged that defendant suffered two prior convictions for serious felonies within the meaning of sections 667, subdivisions (c) and (e)(2)(A), and 1170.12, subdivision (c)(2)(A).
All statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified.
On April 25, 2008, defendant was arraigned on the information wherein he entered a plea of not guilty to the charges and denied the enhancement allegations.
On June 6, 2008, the trial court granted defendant’s request for self-representation.
On November 5, 2008, defendant filed a motion to strike his prior strike convictions arguing that they were unconstitutional. The prosecution filed an opposition to the motion. Thereafter, defendant filed a separate motion to strike his prior strike convictions under People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497. The prosecution filed an opposition. On January 29, 2009, the trial court granted defendant’s motion to strike one of the prior convictions under Romero.
On the same date, January 29, 2009, defendant entered into a plea agreement with the prosecution. Defendant entered a plea of guilty as to count 1, and admitted to suffering a prior strike conviction and a prior prison term. In exchange, it was agreed that defendant would receive a total term of five years in state prison consisting of the midterm of two years on count 1, doubled under sections 667, subdivisions (c) and (e)(2)(A), and 1170.12, subdivision (c)(2)(A), plus one year for the prior prison term conviction. Defendant withdrew his first motion to strike his prior strike convictions on constitutional grounds.
On February 10, 2009, defendant was sentenced to the negotiated term of five years in state prison. Defendant was also ordered to pay a restitution fine in the amount of $200 under section 1202.4, subdivision (b). The court also imposed and stayed a $200 parole revocation fine under section 1202.45. Furthermore, defendant was ordered to pay a $20 court security fee under section 1465.8 and a booking fee of $110.
On March 30, 2009, defendant filed a notice of appeal. Within the notice of appeal, defendant indicated the ground for the appeal was the constitutionality of his prior conviction and requested a certificate of probable cause. The trial court denied the certificate of probable cause.
II
ANALYSIS
At his request, this court appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. 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, setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues, and requesting that we undertake an independent review of the entire record. We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, and he has done so, providing us with a three-page handwritten brief, along with three exhibits attached. Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have conducted an independent review of the record.
In his supplemental brief, defendant, in sum, claims that (1) the trial court erred in failing to strike all his prior strikes because the prosecution overcharged defendant “to gain an advantage in litigation[,]” and the prosecution violated discovery laws; and (2) his sentence is invalid because the prosecution “provided ‘no’ facts to support either [prior] strikes” and the court “made no finding to support § 1192.7 factors[.]”
Notwithstanding defendant’s argument, the record is clear that defendant pled guilty to count 1, admitted to suffering a prior strike conviction and a prior prison term, and agreed to the imposed sentence. Because defendant’s admission to suffering a prior strike conviction and agreement to the five-year sentence were integral parts of the plea agreement, defendant’s argument is a challenge to the guilty plea, which requires a certificate of probable cause. (People v. Panizzon (1996) 13 Cal.4th 68, 79.) Defendant did not obtain a certificate of probable cause; therefore, he may not challenge the validity of his plea agreement. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5.)
We have conducted an independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
III
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: Hollenhorst, Acting P.J., Miller, J.