Opinion
E070200
07-20-2018
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. GABRIELA MUNIQUE VIDAL, Defendant and Appellant.
Richard Schwartzberg, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. INF1300866) OPINION APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. David A. Gunn, Judge. Affirmed. Richard Schwartzberg, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant and appellant Gabriela Munique Vidal pled guilty to second degree commercial burglary (Pen. Code, § 459, count 1). In accordance with the agreement, the court sentenced her to two years in county jail, to run concurrent with sentences that were imposed in other cases on the same day. Defendant subsequently filed a petition for resentencing, pursuant to section 1170.18 (Proposition 47). The court held a hearing and denied the petition without prejudice. Defendant now appeals. We affirm.
All further statutory references will be to the Penal Code, unless otherwise noted. --------
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Defendant was originally charged by felony complaint with commercial burglary (§ 459, counts 1, 8, 12, 17), forging a check (§ 470, subd. (d), counts 2, 5, 9), possessing a forged check (§ 475, subd. (a), counts 3, 6, 10, 13-15) and possession of a stolen check (§ 496, subd. (a), counts 4, 7, 11, 16, 19).
Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant pled guilty to count 1, in exchange for a two-year sentence in county jail, and the court dismissed the remaining counts.
On August 31, 2017, defendant filed a petition for recall of sentence under section 1170.18, alleging that her commercial burglary conviction in count 1 had been designated as a misdemeanor under section 1170.18.
The People filed an opposition to defendant's petition, arguing that defendant was not entitled to relief because she failed to meet her burden. The court set a resentencing hearing.
The court held a hearing on defendant's Proposition 47 petition on February 8, 2018. Defense counsel submitted on the petition, asserting that it should be granted simply because defendant's conviction was for burglary. The People argued that defendant failed to meet her burden. The court then stated that there were three checks originally obtained from stolen mail, and they were altered and deposited in the bank. The court noted defense counsel's problem was that he could not find any information on the amounts of the checks. The court therefore denied the petition without prejudice.
ANALYSIS
After the notice of appeal was filed, this court appointed counsel to represent defendant. 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, setting forth a statement of the case, and identifying one potential arguable issue: whether the trial court erred in finding defendant ineligible for redesignation of count 1 to a misdemeanor under Proposition 47. Counsel stated that the issue before the court was whether defendant had carried her burden of establishing that the burglary did not result in a taking over $950.
Defendant was offered an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which she has not done.
Under People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have conducted an independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
McKINSTER
Acting P. J. We concur: SLOUGH
J. FIELDS
J.