Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Michael R. Libutti, Judge. No. FWV800518
Patrick E. DuNah, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
RAMIREZ P.J.
Defendant, Gabriel Valencia, was sentenced to the upper term of 6 years pursuant to a sentence bargain in which he pled no contest to one count of assault with intent to commit rape (Pen. Code, § 220, subd. (a)). His notice of appeal challenges the validity of the plea.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
Background
On March 29, 2004, defendant entered the victim’s residence while she was asleep. The victim awoke in the middle of the night to discover defendant lying on the floor next to her bed. Thinking it was her boyfriend, the victim asked, “[W]hat’s up baby?” Defendant then crawled into her bed with her, got on top of her and began touching her breast and face. The victim realized defendant was not her boyfriend and ordered him out of the residence. She then called the police.
Defendant was charged with various offenses related to this and other incidents occurring in the same apartment complex, including one count of assault with intent to commit a felony during a residential burglary (§ 220, subd. (b)), one count of residential burglary (§ 459), and two counts of peeking into a residence (§ 647, subd. (i)).
On October 27, 2008, defendant entered into a plea bargain. Pursuant to the agreement, count 5 was added to the complaint, alleging an assault with intent to commit rape (§ 220, subd. (a)), and defendant agreed to plead no contest to that charge, in return for a stipulated sentence of 6 years in state prison and dismissal of the balance of the complaint. As a part of the plea bargain, defendant waived his right to appeal.
On January 15, 2009, defendant made a motion to withdraw his no contest plea on the ground he felt pressured to enter the plea by the prosecutor’s statement he would get a life sentence if he did not plead guilty, and by his attorney’s advice that pleading guilty would be in his best interest. On January 23, 2009, the court denied the motion to withdraw the no contest plea, and sentenced defendant to 6 years in prison pursuant to the plea bargain. Defendant appealed, requesting a certificate of probable cause to raise constitutional or jurisdictional challenges to the legality of the plea. The court denied the request for a certificate of probable cause.
Discussion
Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493] setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues, and requesting that we undertake an independent review of the entire record. We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, but he has not done so. Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have independently reviewed the record for potential error.
Defendant’s notice of appeal includes a request for a certificate of probable cause which was denied by the trial court. Without the certificate of probable cause, constitutional, jurisdictional or other challenges to the validity or voluntariness of the plea is not permitted. (§ 1237.5; People v. Mendez (1999) 19 Cal.4th 1084, 1088.) Because a motion to withdraw a plea involves a challenge to the legality of the plea, an appeal from the denial of such a motion requires a certificate of probable cause. (In re Chavez (2003) 30 Cal.4th 643, 651.)
Even if the certificate of probable cause had issued, we would not find the plea to be invalid. Feeling pressured to plead guilty or no contest because the defendant fears exposure to greater penalties if he is convicted of all charges does not constitute “good cause” to withdraw a plea. Nothing in the record indicates he was under any more or less pressure than every other defendant faced with serious felony charges and the offer of a plea bargain. (People v. Huricks (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 1201, 1208.) The fact that he may have been persuaded, or was reluctant, to accept the plea is not sufficient to warrant the plea being withdrawn. (People v. Ravaux (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 914, 919; People v. Urfer (1979) 94 Cal.App.3d 887, 892.) Thus, even if the request for a certificate of probable cause had been granted, defendant could not show that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion to withdraw the guilty plea.
Finally, defendant waived his right to appeal from any motion he could have made as part of his plea bargain.
We have completed our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
Disposition
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: HOLLENHORST J., MILLER J.