Opinion
D071077
03-17-2017
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. GREG L. THOMAS, Defendant and Appellant.
Janice R. Mazur, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. SCD267963) APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Daniel F. Link, Judge. Affirmed. Janice R. Mazur, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Greg L. Thomas was arrested in a stolen car. A search of the car produced a number of items, which resulted in multiple felony charges against him. Thomas was charged with count 1, unlawful taking and driving a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a); Pen. Code, § 664); count 2, receiving stolen property (§ 496d); count 3, carrying a concealed dirk or dagger (§ 21310); count 4, possession of personal identifying information with intent to defraud (§ 530.5, subd. (c)(1)); count 5, possession of a controlled substance, to wit, ecstasy (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378); count 6, possession of a controlled substance, to wit, methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)).
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified. --------
It was also alleged that Thomas had suffered six prison priors (§ 667.5, subd. (b)) and one strike prior (§ 667, subds. (b)-(i)).
Thomas entered into a plea agreement in which he agreed to plead guilty to count 1 and stipulate to a term of 32 months in prison. All remaining charges and allegations were dismissed. Thomas agreed to waive his right to appeal any suppression motion, issue relating to the strike prior and any stipulated sentence.
Prior to sentencing, Thomas wrote a letter to the court asking to withdraw his guilty plea because he was psychotic at the time of the plea and that his attorney did not look after his best interests.
The trial court held a hearing pursuant to People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118. The court heard from Thomas and discussed the details of his change of plea and current allegations. Thomas said he was told he could appeal his plea, even though he personally waived appeal by initialing the change of plea form. He also said his attorney had failed to communicate with him. After hearing from Thomas and his attorney, the court denied Thomas's request to withdraw his guilty plea.
Thomas was sentenced to 32 months in prison in accordance with the plea agreement.
Thomas filed a timely notice of appeal and requested a certificate of probable cause (§ 1237.5). The trial court denied the request for a certificate of probable cause.
Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Counsel indicates she has not been able to identify any arguable issue for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered Thomas the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal, but he has not responded.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Since this case arises from a guilty plea, we will include a short summary of facts based on the probation officer's report.
San Diego Police Officers located Thomas asleep in the driver's seat of a stolen Honda automobile. The ignition key appeared to be an altered key from a different car.
Several items were found in the car, including a knife, ecstasy, methamphetamine and a number of personal identifications and checks belonging to other persons. Some of the identification materials had been used to make fraudulent purchases.
DISCUSSION
As we have noted, counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and asks this court to review the record for error. In order to assist this court in its review, counsel has identified a possible issue for our consideration, as required by Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders). Counsel identified the following issue:
Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying Thomas's request to withdraw his guilty plea.
We have reviewed the entire record as mandated by Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738. We have not identified any arguable issue for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Thomas on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
/s/_________
HUFFMAN, J. WE CONCUR: /s/_________
McCONNELL, P. J. /s/_________
BENKE, J.