P. v. Azcueta
Filed 4/11/06 P. v. Azcueta CA4/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CHARLIE B. AZCUETA, Defendant and Appellant. | D047035 (Super. Ct. No. SCD191483) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Frank A. Brown, Judge. Affirmed.
Charlie B. Azcueta entered a negotiated guilty plea to discharging a firearm at an inhabited dwelling (Pen. Code, § 246),[1] and admitted a prior strike (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, 668), a prior serious felony conviction (§§ 667, subd. (a)(1), 668), and committing the current crime while released on bail or his own recognizance (§ 12022.1, subd. (b)). The court sentenced him to a stipulated 13 years in prison: double the three-year lower term for discharging a firearm at a dwelling with a prior strike, enhanced five years for the prior serious felony conviction and two years for committing the crime while released on bail or his own recognizance.[2] The record does not include a certificate of probable cause. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 30(b).)
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief setting forth the evidence in the superior court. 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 refers to as possible but not arguable issues: (1) whether there is factual support for the guilty plea; and (2) whether the sentence was in accord with the plea agreement.
We granted Azcueta permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not responded. A review of the entire record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, including the possible issues referred to pursuant to Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issue. Competent counsel has represented Azcueta on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NARES, J.
WE CONCUR:
McCONNELL, P. J.
BENKE, J.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney referral.
Analysis and review provided by Vista Apartment Manager Attorneys.
[1] All statutory references are to the Penal Code.
[2] Because Azcueta entered a guilty plea, he cannot challenge the facts underlying the conviction. (§ 1237.5; People v. Martin (1973) 9 Cal.3d 687, 693.) We need not recite the facts.
