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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
William Davies, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Chief Assistant Attorney General, and Charles A. French, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
-ooOoo-
Initially, by criminal complaint filed February 28, 2006,[1]appellant Angel Mendoza was charged with robbery (Pen. Code, § 211)[2]and it was alleged that he had suffered a prior conviction that qualified as a â€
Description
Initially, by criminal complaint filed February 28, 2006, appellant Angel Mendoza was charged with robbery (Pen. Code, S 211) and it was alleged that he had suffered a prior conviction that qualified as a "strike" and as a prior serious felony conviction (S 667, subd. (a)). Also on February 28, appellant entered a plea of not guilty and denied the strike allegation. On March 10, pursuant to a plea agreement, appellant withdrew his not guilty plea and the denials of the strike and prior serious felony conviction allegations; pled guilty to committing petty theft after having suffered a conviction of a theft-related offense (S 666); and admitted the strike allegation. Also on March 10, the court, pursuant to the plea agreement, imposed a prison term of six years, consisting of the upper term of three years, doubled pursuant to the three strikes law (SS 667, subd. (e)(1); 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)). One of the other terms of the plea agreement was that the court would recall that sentence and impose a prison term of 32 months if appellant appeared in court on March 15. The court ordered appellant to appear on that date for surrender.Following independent review of the record, court have concluded that no reasonably arguable legal or factual issues exist.
