Opinion
F073162
11-03-2017
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. AKWETTE ABOYOMI SUDI THOMAS, Defendant and Appellant.
William W. Lee, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. F14908020)
OPINION
THE COURT APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. F. Brian Alvarez, Judge. William W. Lee, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Before Gomes, Acting P.J., Poochigian, J. and Smith, J.
-ooOoo-
Appointed counsel for defendant Akwette Aboyomi Sudi Thomas asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We sent a letter to defendant, advising him of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. That letter was returned, labeled "return to sender, inmate discharged/par or unable to forward." On review, we find no arguable issues.
We provide the following brief description of the factual and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)
On August 24, 2014, police stopped defendant while he was driving a stolen car. The police searched him and found a glass pipe for smoking methamphetamine.
On August 26, 2014, a complaint charged defendant with unlawfully taking or driving a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), receiving a stolen vehicle (Veh. Code, § 496d, subd. (a)), and possessing a smoking device (Health & Saf. Code, § 11364.1, subd. (a)). The complaint also alleged defendant had suffered a prior conviction for receiving a stolen vehicle (§§ 469d, 666.5), had suffered a prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)), and had served six prior prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (b)).
On November 20, 2014, defendant raised a Marsden motion for substitute appointed counsel, which the trial court granted after a hearing.
People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 (Marsden).
On March 13, 2015, defendant raised another Marsden motion for substitute appointed counsel, which the trial court denied after a hearing.
On April 17, 2015, defendant raised a third Marsden motion, which the trial court denied after a hearing.
On April 24, 2015, defendant raised an oral motion for resentencing pursuant to Proposition 47 (§ 1170.18), requesting that the court reduce to misdemeanors his felony convictions for unlawfully taking or driving a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)) and receiving a stolen vehicle (Veh. Code, § 496d). The trial court concluded these offenses were not eligible for relief and denied the motion.
On May 8, 2015, the trial court granted defendant's Faretta motion to represent himself.
Faretta v. California (1975) 422 U.S. 806.
On June 18, 2015, defendant pled guilty to unlawfully taking or driving a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), admitted having been previously convicted of receiving a stolen vehicle (§ 469d) pursuant to section 666.5, and admitted having suffered a prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)). Defendant initialed and signed a plea form that stated, among other things, he was giving up his right to "PRESENT EVIDENCE at no cost to me and to have the court issue subpenas to bring into court all witnesses and evidence favorable to me." Defendant entered into a Cruz waiver continuing his sentencing to allow him to enter a substance abuse rehabilitation program.
People v. Cruz (1988) 44 Cal.3d 1247, 1254, fn. 5.
On January 25, 2016, defendant moved to withdraw his guilty plea on the ground that he was unaware of his right to subpoena witnesses to support his defense. The trial court denied the motion. Defendant also unsuccessfully requested that the court dismiss a prior strike conviction pursuant to Romero. The court sentenced defendant to the low term of two years, doubled pursuant to the Three Strikes law (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)), and imposed various fines and fees.
People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497. --------
On January 25, 2016, defendant filed a notice of appeal.
After a review of the entire record, we see no arguable errors on appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.