From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Whitaker

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
Apr 30, 2008
No. D052183 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 30, 2008)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. STEVEN WHITAKER, Defendant and Appellant. D052183 California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, First Division April 30, 2008

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, No. SCD206116 John S. Einhorn, Judge.

HUFFMAN, J.

Steven Whitaker entered a negotiated guilty plea to forcible rape with a foreign object (Pen. Code, § 289, subd. (a)(1)) and admitted he was ineligible for probation (§ 1203.065, subd. (a)) and had a strike (§§ 667 subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, 668) and two serious felony prior convictions (§§ 667, subd. (a)(1), 668, 1192.7, subd. (c)). The court sentenced him to 16 years in prison: the three-year lower term, doubled, and five years for each serious felony prior. Whitaker appeals. We affirm.

All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

BACKGROUND

Seventeen-year-old S.P., her mother, and her brother lived with Whitaker (S.'s godfather) and his wife. On April 21, 2007, when S. and Whitaker were home alone, he massaged her shoulders as she sat at the computer. He massaged her stomach, her thighs, and asked her if she "wanted it." She said, "No." He left the room, returned two minutes later, and again asked if she "wanted it." She again said, "No." He picked her up by the waist, put her on the floor, took off her pants, pried her legs apart, orally copulated her and put his fingers in her vagina.

DISCUSSION

Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief summarizing the facts and proceedings below. Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel lists, as possible but not arguable issues: (1) whether the waiver of the right to appeal is valid; (2) whether the plea is constitutionally valid; and (3) whether defense counsel was ineffective.

We granted Whitaker permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not responded. A review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, including the possible issues listed pursuant to Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issues. Whitaker has been competently represented by counsel on this appeal.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

WE CONCUR: McCONNELL, P. J., BENKE, J.


Summaries of

People v. Whitaker

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
Apr 30, 2008
No. D052183 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 30, 2008)
Case details for

People v. Whitaker

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. STEVEN WHITAKER, Defendant and…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division

Date published: Apr 30, 2008

Citations

No. D052183 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 30, 2008)