Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
Sonoma County Super. Ct. No. SCR460161
Sepulveda, J.
Defendant appeals from a judgment following his plea of guilty; he does not challenge the validity of the plea. His counsel asks us to review the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.
Defendant was originally charged with felony assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code section 245, subd. (a)), with misdemeanor hit and run (Veh. Code § 20002, subd. (a)), and misdemeanor driving under the influence (Veh. Code § 23152, subd. (a)) with a prior offense of driving with a .08 or greater blood alcohol under Vehicle Code section 23152, subdivision (b). Pursuant to a negotiated disposition, the felony was reduced to a misdemeanor and defendant pleaded guilty to all three misdemeanor counts. Subsequent motions to withdraw his plea and to remove his counsel were denied.
Defendant was represented by counsel below. He was advised of his constitutional rights, as well as the consequences of his plea, and waived those rights. Counsel stipulated there was a factual basis for the plea. No error appears in the court’s denial of defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea, or in his sentencing. There are no arguable issues on appeal.
Defendant asserted in the motion to withdraw his plea that he was not fully advised of the consequences of his plea. Counsel who had represented him at the time of the entry of his plea testified that defendant was fully advised of the consequences, with the exception of possible collateral Department of Motor Vehicle (DMV) consequences for a misdemeanor conviction of assault with a deadly weapon involving a vehicle. Counsel representing defendant at the motion to withdraw his plea clarified that DMV would take no action on defendant’s driving privilege for such a misdemeanor conviction. The motion was properly denied.
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: Ruvolo, P.J., Reardon, J.