Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County No. DF-007816A. Robert S. Tafoya, Judge.
John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
Before Cornell, Acting P.J., Gomes, J. and Kane, J.
Pursuant to a plea agreement, appellant Gabriel Hiram Vega pled no contest to felony stalking (Pen. Code, § 646.9, subd. (a)). The court suspended imposition of sentence, placed appellant on three years’ probation and ordered that he be confined in county jail for the first year of his probationary period. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal in which he requested a certificate of probable cause (Pen. Code, § 127.5). The court denied that request.
Appellant’s appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which summarizes the pertinent facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks that this court independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Appellant, in response to this court’s invitation to submit supplemental briefing, has himself submitted briefs in which he argues, as best we can determine, that (1) he did not enter his no contest plea freely and voluntarily and was therefore denied his constitutional right to a jury trial, and (2) the judge who presided over the entry-of-plea and sentencing proceedings was biased against him and erroneously failed to disqualify himself.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The Instant Offense
According to the report of the probation officer, a police report indicates the following: A police officer, responding to “a report of a subject violating a restraining order,” spoke with appellant’s two daughters who stated “there was evidence appellant had entered the house without permission” and appellant was hiding behind a tree in front of the house. “The officer contacted [appellant] who was in possession of a duffel bag which was removed from his ex-wife’s garage.” The officer arrested appellant and transported him to the police station “at which time the officer learned [appellant] violated the protection order [sic] against him on four other separate occasions over the past year.”
Additional Background
Appellant asserts that Judge Robert Tafoya, who presided over the entry-of-plea and sentencing proceedings, (1) represented him in a criminal matter in 1980 when, according to appellant, Judge Tafoya was a deputy public defender; (2) also presided over a case in “family law court” in Delano in 2007 in which, appellant suggests, he is a party; and (3) has “personal knowledge of disputed facts concerning the [instant case].” (Unnecessary capitalization omitted.) On March 29, 2007, appellant made, and Judge Tafoya denied, a motion that the “[instant] case be transferred to Bakersfield.” (Unnecessary capitalization omitted.)
DISCUSSION
Both of the claims raised by appellant are barred by the absence of a certificate of probable cause. A criminal defendant who appeals following a plea of no contest or guilty without a certificate of probable cause can only (1) challenge the denial of a motion to suppress evidence or (2) raise grounds arising after the entry of the plea that do not affect its validity. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b)(4).) Neither of the claims appellant raises on appeal come within either of these exceptions to the requirement of a certificate of probable cause.
Appellant also asks that this court “relieve[]” Judge Tafoya from case #D-1503-FL-50078 of the Family Law Court, of the Delano-McFarland branch of Kern Co” (Unnecessary capitalization omitted.) This request is not properly before us, and we will not address it.
Following independent review of the record, we have concluded that no reasonably arguable legal or factual issues exist.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.