Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County No. SCD204544, Robert F. O'Neill, Judge.
BENKE, J.
Richard Maximillian Tafoya entered a negotiated guilty plea to check forgery (Pen. Code, § 470, subd. (d)) and admitted he had a prior strike conviction (§ 667, subds. (b) -(i)) and had served a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). The trial court sentenced Tafoya to a stipulated 44-month prison term.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
FACTS
On February 4, 2007, Tafoya attempted to purchase several items in an Ikea store with a counterfeit check in the amount of $314.87 and a counterfeit driver's license. The store cashier became suspicious and notified the store's loss prevention officers. Tafoya tried to elude these officers but they detained him before he left the store. San Diego police officers subsequently arrested Tafoya.
On February 20 Tafoya pled guilty to check forgery and admitted the prior strike conviction and one prior prison term in exchange for a stipulated 44-month sentence. The prosecution also agreed to dismiss a burglary count, a possession of a forged driver's license count and a possession of drug paraphernalia count, as well as four prior prison term allegations.
On June 29 the trial court sentenced Tafoya to the stipulated aggregate term of 44 months. Tafoya received 32 months for the check forgery (doubling the lower term under the Three Strikes Law) and a one-year consecutive enhancement for the prior prison term.
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief setting forth evidence in the superior court. Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel refers to as possible, but not arguable, issues: (1) whether Tafoya was properly advised of his constitutional rights and consequences of pleading guilty; and (2) whether Tafoya voluntarily waived his rights.
We granted Tafoya permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not responded.
A review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, including the possible issues referred to by appellate counsel, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issues. Competent counsel has represented Tafoya on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
WE CONCUR: McCONNELL, P. J., IRION, J.