P. v. Bauer

Filed 2/28/06 P. v. Bauer CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Sierra)

----

Pursuant to a negotiated settlement, defendant Jeffrey Robert Bauer pleaded no contest to conflict of interest (Gov. Code, § 1090) and misappropriation of public funds (Pen. Code, § 424). He was granted probation conditioned upon, inter alia, service of 240 days in county jail and payment of restitution and fines totaling $308,974.07.

Defendant appeals.

We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief.

Defendant has filed a supplemental brief contending (1) it was error to deny his Penal Code section 995 motion, (2) Government Code section 1090 does not apply in this case because it is void for vagueness, and (3) raising various challenges to the facts of the case.

As to defendant's first contention, he may not obtain review of the court's denial of his Penal Code section 995 motion following a plea of guilty or no contest. (People v. Truman (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1816, 1820-1821; Pen. Code, § 1237.5.^[1])

Defendant's challenge to the constitutionality of

Government Code section 1090 is, in substance, a challenge to the validity of his plea, and, therefore, review is predicated upon his having obtained a certificate of probable cause as required by Penal Code section 1237.5. (See People v. Buttram (2003) 30 Cal.4th 773, 781-782; People v. Moore (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 94, 99-101.) Since defendant does not have the required certificate, we do not review the claim. (See People v. Mendez (1999) 19 Cal.4th 1084, 1097 [defendant may not obtain review of certificate issues unless he has complied with Penal Code section 1237.5].)

As to defendant's challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction, such issues are not reviewable following a plea of guilty or no contest. (People v. Turner (1985) 171 Cal.App.3d 116, 125-126.)

We have undertaken an examination of the entire record and find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

BUTZ , J.

We concur:

BLEASE , Acting P. J.

ROBIE , J.

Publication courtesy of Vista Criminal Law Attorney (http://www.mcmillanlaw.us/) And Vista Lawyers Directory

( http://www.fearnotlaw.com/ )

^[1] Penal Code section 1237.5 provides:

â€