Opinion
E074284
07-30-2020
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ROBERT RICHARD ROJO, Defendant and Appellant.
William Paul Melcher, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. FWV19003693) OPINION APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Khymberli S.Y. Apaloo, Judge. Affirmed. William Paul Melcher, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant and appellant Robert Richard Rojo pled guilty to making criminal threats. (Pen. Code, § 422, count 1.) He also admitted he had one prior strike conviction. (§§ 1170.12, subd. (a), 667, subds. (b)-(i).) In accordance with the agreement, a trial court sentenced him to six years in state prison, with credit for time served, and imposed various fees and fines.
All further statutory references will be to the Penal Code, unless otherwise indicated. --------
Defendant filed a notice of appeal, in propria persona. Thereafter, appellate counsel filed an amended notice of appeal, based on the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea. We affirm.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On November 13, 2019, defendant was charged by felony complaint with making criminal threats. (§ 422, count 1.) The complaint also alleged that he had one prior strike conviction. (§§ 1170.12, subd. (a), 667, subds. (b)-(i).) Defendant indicated his desire to enter an unconditional guilty plea to the maximum penalty. Pursuant to the plea agreement, he pled guilty to count 1 and admitted the prior strike conviction. The court sentenced him to six years in state prison, with credit for time served. The court imposed various fees and fines without objection. However, upon defendant's request, the court waived his attorney fees.
DISCUSSION
After the notice of appeal was filed, this court appointed counsel to represent defendant. 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, and identifying one potential arguable issue: whether the trial court's imposition of a court operations assessment under Penal Code section 1465.8, a court facilities fee under Government Code section 70373, and a restitution fine under Penal Code section 1202.4, subdivision (b), was proper under People v. Duenas (2019) 30 Cal.App.5th 1157.
Defendant was offered an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.
Under People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have conducted an independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
FIELDS
J. We concur: MILLER
Acting P. J. CODRINGTON
J.