Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County No. VA108639, Michael L. Schuur, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.).
William D. Farber, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
KLEIN, P. J.
Randall Earl Williams appeals from the judgment entered following his plea of no contest to dissuading a witness from reporting a crime (Pen. Code, § 136.1, subd. (b)(1)). The trial court sentenced Williams to 16 months in state prison. We affirm the judgment.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The facts have been taken from the transcript of the preliminary hearing.
On December 15, 2008, Williams’s former girlfriend, Lashenn Janaee Wilson, was at home at her apartment on Laurel Avenue in Whittier. A friend of Wilson’s was visiting and was also at the apartment. The two women were asleep when Williams arrived at approximately 1:30 a.m.
Williams and Wilson had dated “on and off” for approximately seven years. Wilson was asleep in her room when Williams came in “cussing and yelling,... asking [Wilson] where his check was.” Williams apparently believed that Wilson had a check that belonged to him. Williams attempted to make Wilson’s friend leave the apartment. When he was unsuccessful, he turned his attention to Wilson. Williams, who appeared to be upset, slapped Wilson in the face. When Wilson’s friend then attempted to call 911, Williams “snatched the phone cord off the wall.”
After slapping Wilson two more times, Williams ran out of the apartment to Wilson’s car, where two of his friends were waiting. One of Williams’s friends was driving Wilson’s 2002 Chrysler. Wilson, who knew that Williams had taken the car, had reported it stolen two days earlier, on December 13, 2008.
Los Angeles County Deputy Sheriff Amber Veatch received a report of a crime being committed at approximately 1:30 a.m. on December 15, 2008. Veatch and her partner went to Wilson’s apartment on Laurel Avenue and spoke with a woman named Cloud. Cloud told the deputies that, while she was sleeping on the couch, Williams entered the apartment and went into the bedroom. Cloud heard a “scuffle” and became frightened. Williams then came out of the bedroom screaming, “ ‘Bitches[,] where is my check?’ ” At that point, Cloud ran for the phone in the kitchen and began to dial 911. Williams, however, came over, pulled the phone jack from the wall and yelled, “ ‘Whatcha going to do now bitch?’ ” After hitting Wilson in the face three or four times, Williams knocked over the Christmas tree then ran out of the apartment. In the meantime, Cloud had telephoned the police by using her cell phone.
2. Procedural history.
On January 20, 2009, Williams was charged by information with unlawfully driving or taking a motor vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), dissuading a witness from reporting a crime (§ 136.l, subd. (b)(1)) and misdemeanor battery (§ 243, subd. (e)(1)). It was further alleged that Williams previously had been convicted of violating California Vehicle Code section 10851 on November 24, 1992 and August 23, 1995, and that he had served two prison terms within the meaning of section 667.5.
After waiving arraignment, Williams pleaded not guilty to the alleged charges and denied the special allegations. The matter was set for trial. However, on February 11, 2009, Williams made a Marsden motion. After the district attorney left the courtroom, Williams indicated he did not believe his counsel cared about his case and that he, Williams, had a “lack of confidence” in counsel. Williams indicated his counsel would not explain things to him and “forced [him] to sign a piece of paper before he even talked to [Williams].” When the trial court asked counsel if he would be ready for trial, counsel responded, “Yes.” When Williams complained that counsel just talked to him “real bad,” the trial court indicated that Williams had the option of retaining private counsel. Williams indicated that he would be unable to do that and the trial court advised him that it was not necessary for him to “get along with counsel” for counsel to perform adequately. The trial court indicated that the fact that counsel had cursed at Williams and that Williams did not like his counsel were not sufficient grounds for the court to relieve counsel.
People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118.
On February 25, 2009, Williams agreed to plead no contest to count 2, dissuading a witness from reporting a crime (§ 136.1, subd. (b)(1)). In exchange, Williams would serve the low term of 16 months in state prison and the remaining counts and allegations would be dismissed.
After waiving his right to a court or jury trial, his right to confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him, his right to subpoena witnesses and present a defense and his privilege against self-incrimination, Williams pleaded no contest to dissuading a witness from reporting a crime pursuant to People v. West (1970) 3 Cal.3d 595, 604-608. At the same proceedings, the trial court sentenced Williams to the low term of 16 months in state prison. Williams was awarded presentence custody credit for 105 days, consisting of 70 days actually served and 35 days of good time/work time. Williams was ordered to pay a restitution fine in the amount of $200 (§ 1202.4, subd, (b)), a stayed $200 parole revocation restitution fine (§ 1202.45), a $20 court security assessment (§ 1465.8, subd. (a)(1)) and a $30 criminal conviction assessment. On the People’s motion, the trial court then dismissed all remaining charges and allegations.
Defense counsel did “not concur in the plea” and indicated that “[d]efendant [was] pleading against [the] advice of counsel.”
Williams filed a timely notice of appeal on April 2, 2009. His request for a certificate of probable cause was granted.
This court appointed counsel to represent Williams on June 5, 2009.
CONTENTIONS
After examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief which raised no issues and requested this court to conduct an independent review of the record. By notice filed September 1, 2009, the clerk of this court advised Williams to submit within 30 days any contentions, grounds of appeal or arguments he wished this court to consider. No response has been received to date.
REVIEW ON APPEAL
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied counsel has complied fully with counsel’s responsibilities. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 278-284; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 443.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: KITCHING, J., ALDRICH, J.