Filed 4/20/22 P. v. Jones CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Christopher S. Pallone, Judge. Affirmed.

Anita Jog, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

After pleading guilty to one count of grand theft in exchange for time served and 24 months’ probation, Corey Alphonso Jones appealed his sentence. His attorney has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende and Anders v. California[1] informing this court they were unable to identify any errors and asking us to perform an independent review of the record. Based on our independent review of the record, we find no error and affirm.

I. FACTS

On June 8, 2020, the San Bernardino County District Attorney charged Jones with one count of grand theft. (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (a), unlabeled statutory citations refer to this code.) On September 21, 2021, Jones pled no contest to the charge, waived a report from a probation officer, and requested immediate sentencing. In exchange for his plea, San Bernardino County Superior Court Judge Christopher Pallone sentenced Jones to time served and 24 months’ probation.

Jones filed a timely notice of appeal stating his challenge was “based on the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea that do not affect the validity of the plea.” However, Jones also requested a certificate of probable cause, and specified that the grounds were “I am not guilty of the crime . . . . There is camera footage showing that I am not guilty of this crime.” San Bernardino County Superior Court Judge John P. Vander Feer denied the request for certificate of probable cause the next day.

II. ANALYSIS

We appointed counsel to represent Jones on appeal, and counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende and Anders v. California, setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts and potential arguable issues, and asking us to conduct an independent review of the record.

Counsel’s brief raised two potential issues for our consideration: whether the sufficiency of the evidence supporting a guilty plea can be challenged on appeal without a certificate of probable cause, and if so, whether there was sufficient evidence to prove the elements of the crimes alleged. We offered Jones an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, and he has not done so.

We have independently reviewed the record for potential error as required by People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106 and find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to Jones.

III. DISPOSITION

We affirm the judgment.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

SLOUGH

Acting P. J.

We concur:

RAPHAEL

J.

MENETREZ

J.

[1] People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436; Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738.