From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Tran

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
Sep 11, 2008
No. D052287 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 11, 2008)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DAVID VAN TRAN, Defendant and Appellant. D052287 California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, First Division September 11, 2008

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County No. SCD198657, Melinda J. Lasater, Judge.

McINTYRE, Acting P. J.

David Van Tran entered a negotiated guilty plea to attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 664/187, subd. (a) (statutory references are to the Penal Code)) and admitted he committed the offense for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)). Tran also admitted that in the commission of the offense at least one principal was armed with a firearm (§ 12022, subd. (a)(1)). Under the plea bargain, the prosecution agreed to dismiss other charges, and the parties agreed to a sentencing range of 16 years to 20 years in prison.

The trial court sentenced Tran to 18 years in prison: the midterm of seven years on the attempted murder count; a 10-year gang enhancement and one year for firearm enhancement.

Tran did not obtain a certificate of probable cause.

FACTS

At about 1:00 a.m. or 2:00 a.m., on April 29, 2006, brothers Ryan Baldwin and Jayce Baldwin were returning home after attending a party. Jayce Baldwin was driving east on Mira Mesa Boulevard and made an abrupt stop at a yellow traffic light. There were two vehicles behind the Baldwin brothers; the occupants in one of the vehicles were staring at the Baldwin car and yelling. Jayce Baldwin thought they may have been angry because of the abrupt stop. After the light changed, the Baldwin brothers noticed the two vehicles following them, with one vehicle flashing its lights. After driving for about five more minutes, Jayce Baldwin stopped the car to find out why he was being followed.

Both brothers exited their vehicle and walked in the direction of the two other vehicles. Ryan Baldwin was carrying what looked like a club with a taped handle. Eight to 10 Asian individuals got out of the two vehicles, threw their hands up and said: "Asian Crips" and "What's up now."

One of the Asian individuals displayed a gun and pointed it at Jayce Baldwin. The Baldwin brothers retreated to their vehicle. Immediately after Jayce started to drive away, six or eight gunshots were fired. The second or third shot hit Ryan Baldwin. Jayce Baldwin drove his brother to a hospital. The bullet ricocheted off Ryan Baldwin's shoulder and hit his thoracic fifth vertebrae. Ryan Baldwin was hospitalized for 30 days and had his spine fused from the second to the seventh vertebrae. Ryan Baldwin initially sustained paralysis, but by the time of sentencing he was able to walk small distances with a cane.

During a traffic stop, police pulled over a vehicle being driven by James Nguyen, a codefendant in this case. Christopher Bui, another codefendant, was a passenger. During a search of the vehicle, police found a .40 caliber gun in the trunk, wrapped in a black glove, underneath a sweatshirt under the spare tire. Nguyen admitted being present during the shooting with Bui. Nguyen also admitted shooting three rounds into the Baldwin vehicle.

When Tran was interviewed, he admitted being present during the shooting. Initially, Tran said he did not know who shot Ryan Baldwin, but later said Nguyen had told him while they were at Juvenile Hall that he was the shooter.

After the plea but before sentencing, Tran told the probation officer that he was the shooter.

DISCUSSION

Appointed appellate counsel filed a brief setting forth evidence in the superior court. Counsel did not present any argument for reversal, but asked that this court 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 Tran was properly advised of his constitutional rights and the consequences of pleading guilty, and did he voluntarily waive his rights; (2) whether the prosecutor properly offered Tran's codefendant's better offers; (3) whether it was proper to impose a 10-year enhancement on the gang allegation when the codefendants received gang enhancements of three years and five years; (4) whether the court abused its discretion by not sentencing Tran to the mitigated sentence of 16 years; and (5) whether a certificate of probable cause is needed to challenge the court's exercise of sentencing discretion.

We also granted Tran 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 Tran on this appeal.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

WE CONCUR: AARON, J., IRION, J.


Summaries of

People v. Tran

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
Sep 11, 2008
No. D052287 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 11, 2008)
Case details for

People v. Tran

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DAVID VAN TRAN, Defendant and…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division

Date published: Sep 11, 2008

Citations

No. D052287 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 11, 2008)