In re Phillip J.
Filed 10/24/06 In re Phillip J. CA1/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
| In re PHILLIP J., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | |
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. PHILLIP J., Defendant and Appellant. | A114044 (Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. J05-01898) |
Counsel appointed for defendant Phillip J. has asked this court to independently examine the record in accordance with People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, to determine if there are any arguable issues that require briefing. We have conducted that review, conclude there are no arguable issues, and affirm.
Our examination[1] reveals that on July 19, 2005, two individuals-subsequently identified as defendant and V.B.-entered a Subway Sandwich Shop in Rodeo wearing t-shirts over their heads to disguise their faces and immediately walked towards the counter area where the cash register was located. V.B. jumped over the counter and pushed Parmjit Bal, part owner of the store, out of the way, telling her, “Don’t touch me, stand over there.” Bal was frightened and did as she was told. V.B. then removed $300.00 from the cash register, jumped back over the counter, and fled the store with defendant, who had remained on the customer side of the counter during the incident.
Several days later, the police obtained video surveillance from a neighboring business which showed two individuals putting on their disguises prior to entering the Subway store. The school resource officer at John Swett High School identified the two individuals as defendant and V.B.
On August 8, 2005, defendant was arrested on robbery and burglary charges. He was cited and released to his mother.
By petition filed October 27, 2005, defendant was charged with one felony count of second degree robbery in violation of Penal Code sections 211/212.5, subdivision (c).
On March 23, 2006, the complaint was amended to dismiss the original count and add two new felony counts to which defendant pleaded no contest: grand theft from a person in violation of Penal Code section 487, subdivision (c), and second degree commercial burglary in violation of Penal Code sections 459/460, subdivision (b).
On May 4, 2006, defendant, who was 16-years-old at the time of the incident, was adjudged a ward of the court and ordered to serve two weekends at juvenile hall. The court imposed the standard conditions of probation and additional terms, including that defendant complete 150 hours of community service, pay restitution to the victim of $300, and pay a restitution fine of $200.
Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal.
The scope of reviewable issues on appeal after a guilty plea is restricted to matters based on constitutional, jurisdictional, or other grounds going to the legality of the proceedings leading to the plea; guilt or innocence are not included. (People v. DeVaughn (1977) 18 Cal.3d 889, 895-896.)
Defendant’s change of plea complied with Boykin v. Alabama (1969) 395 U.S. 238 and In re Tahl (1969) 1 Cal.3d 122.
Defendant was represented by competent counsel who guarded his rights and interests.
The sentence imposed is authorized by law.
Our independent review having found no arguable issues that require briefing, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
_________________________
Richman, J.
We concur:
_________________________
Kline, P.J.
_________________________
Haerle, J.
Publication Courtesy of California free legal resources.
Analysis and review provided by Spring Valley Property line Lawyers.
[1] Because defendant pleaded no contest, we derive these facts from the probation officer’s report and recommendation.
