P. v. Padilla
Filed 7/16/07 P. v. Padilla CA2/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JESUS DELGADO PADILLA, Defendant and Appellant. | B197548 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No.KA077665) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County,
Jack P. Hunt, Judge. Affirmed.
William D. Farber, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
_________________________
Jesus Delgado Padilla (Padilla) appeals the judgment entered following his plea of guilty to assault with the intent to commit the felony of rape (Pen. Code, 220)[1] and his admission he had previously been convicted of a serious or violent felony within the meaning of the Three Strikes law ( 667, subds. (b)-(i); 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)) and section 667, subdivision (a)(1). Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, the trial court sentenced Padilla to a term of nine years in prison. We affirm the judgment.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
1. Facts.[2]
At approximately 9:15 p.m. on January 8, 2007, Angelica D. was walking home from work. She was near the intersection of Peck and Killian Streets in Los Angeles County when Padilla approached Angelica D. from behind, threw her into some bushes, covered her mouth to keep her from yelling or screaming and attempted to lift up her blouse. Angelica D. managed to fight off Padilla by kicking him and hitting him with her fists. After she crawled out of the bushes, Angelica D. was able to flag down a passing vehicle. The occupants of the vehicle got out, chased Padilla, caught him and held him until law enforcement officers arrived.
2. Procedural History.
In an amended felony complaint filed January 10, 2007, Padilla was charged with assault with intent to commit the felony of rape in violation of section 220. It was further alleged Padilla had previously been convicted of robbery ( 211) within the meaning of the Three Strikes law ( 667, subds. (b)-(i); 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)) and section 667, subdivision (a)(1).
At proceedings held on February 21, 2007, Padilla entered into a negotiated plea agreement under the terms of which he was to plead guilty to the charge of assault with
the intent to commit rape and admit having previously been convicted of a serious or
violent felony in exchange for a sentence of nine years in state prison. After being advised of and waiving his rights to a preliminary hearing, a court or jury trial, to confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him, to remain silent and to present a defense, Padilla pleaded guilty to the charge of assault with intent to commit rape and admitted having previously been convicted of the serious or violent felony of robbery.
At the same proceedings, the trial court sentenced Padilla to the low term of two years in state prison for his conviction of assault with intent to commit rape, then doubled the term to four years pursuant to the Three Strikes law. For his conviction of a prior serious or violent felony, the trial court imposed a consecutive term of five years in prison, for a total term of nine years. The trial court ordered Padilla to pay a $200 restitution fine ( 1202.4, subd. (b)), a suspended $200 parole revocation restitution fine ( 1202.45), a $300 habitual sex offender fund fine ( 290.3) and a $20 court security fee ( 1465.8, subd. (a)(1)). Padilla was awarded presentence custody credit for 45 days actually served and six days of good time/work time, for a total of 51 days.
On March 6, 2007, Padilla filed a timely notice of appeal.
This court appointed counsel to represent Padilla on appeal on May 7, 2007.
CONTENTIONS
Counsel filed an opening brief which raised no issues and requested this court to conduct an independent review of the record.
By notice dated May 22, 2007, the clerk of this court advised Padilla to submit within 30 days any contention, ground of appeal, or argument he wished this court to consider. No response has been received to date.
REVIEW ON APPEAL
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied Padillas counsel has complied fully with counsels responsibilities. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 278-284; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 443.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
KLEIN, P. J.
We concur:
CROSKEY, J.
KITCHING, J.
Publication courtesy of California free legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Carlsbad Property line Lawyers.
[1] All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
[2] The facts have been taken from the probation report.
