Opinion
E053254 Super.Ct.No. FVI1002006
10-31-2011
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DEONTE DESHON WASHINGTON, Defendant and Appellant.
Maureen M. Bodo, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
OPINION
APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Miriam Ivy Morton, Judge. Affirmed.
Maureen M. Bodo, 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 Deonte Deshon Washington pled no contest to shooting at an inhabited dwelling (Pen. Code, § 246) and admitted that he had suffered one prior serious or violent felony conviction (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subd. (b), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)). In return, the remaining allegations were dismissed, and defendant was sentenced to the stipulated term of 10 years in state prison with credit for time served. Defendant appeals from the judgment, challenging the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea as well as the validity of the plea. We find no error and affirm the judgment.
I
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The factual background is taken from documents containing in the supplemental clerk's transcript.
Following an apparent altercation between defendant's family and defendant's ex-girlfriend's family on August 31, 2010, defendant shot at his ex-girlfriend's home from a nearby field. At some point, defendant and his two brothers were arrested. It was later discovered that defendant had tested positive for gunpowder residue.
On September 2, 2010, a three-count felony complaint was filed, charging defendant with shooting at an inhabited dwelling (Pen. Code, § 246; count 1); being a felon in possession of a firearm (Pen. Code, § 12021, subd. (a)(1); count 2); and actively participating in a criminal street gang (Pen. Code, § 186.22, subd. (a); count 3). The complaint also alleged that defendant had committed counts 1 and 2 for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with a criminal street gang (Pen. Code, § 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(B)). The complaint further alleged that defendant had suffered one prior serious or violent felony conviction (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subd. (b), 1170.12, subd. (a)-(d)), one prior serious felony (Pen. Code, § 667, subd. (a)(1)), and one prior prison term (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)).
On September 15, 2010, pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant pled no contest to count 1 and admitted that he had suffered a prior strike conviction in exchange for a stipulated 10-year sentence and the dismissal of the remaining charges and enhancements.
On October 1, 2010, prior to sentencing, defendant sent a letter to the court, stating that he wished to withdraw his plea. On February 10, 2011, defendant formally filed a motion to withdraw his plea, claiming he was innocent, he had entered the plea due to emotional distress, and his counsel was ineffective. The People filed opposition.
The hearing on the motion was held on March 24, 2011. Following the presentation of evidence, the trial court denied defendant's motion to withdraw his plea. Defendant was thereafter immediately sentenced in accordance with his plea agreement (the middle term of five years on count 1, doubled to 10 years due to the prior strike conviction) and awarded credit for time served.
On March 24, 2011, defendant filed a notice of appeal challenging the validity of the plea and other matters occurring after the plea and a request for certificate of probable cause. Defendant's request for certificate of probable cause was granted.
II
DISCUSSION
Defendant appealed and, upon his request, this court appointed counsel to represent him. 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 this court undertake a 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 independently reviewed the record for potential error. We have now completed our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
III
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
RICHLI
J.
We concur:
RAMIREZ
P.J.
HOLLENHORST
J.