P. v. Sanchez
Filed 10/18/06 P. v. Sanchez CA1/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FIVE
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RAUL SANCHEZ, Defendant and Appellant. |
A112554
(San Mateo County Super. Ct. No. SC 058606) |
Defendant Raul Sanchez appeals his conviction by guilty plea of first degree residential burglary (Pen. Code, § 460, subd. (a)) and two counts of first degree robbery within a dwelling (Pen. Code, § 212.5, subd. (a)). Defendant also admitted the use of a knife during the commission of the two robberies (Pen. Code, § 12022, subd. (b)). The plea agreement called for dismissal of all other counts and a state prison sentence of 10 years. The court imposed the 10-year sentence with presentence credit of 317 days. A $200 restitution fine was imposed and a $200 parole restitution fine was suspended. Restitution to the State Crime Victim’s Compensation Board and to two separate victims was ordered. Counsel has asked for our independent review of the record. (Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.)
Background[1]
On July 28, 2004, a San Bruno residence was broken into and the intruder stole
jewelry and a camera. A fingerprint inside the home was identified as defendant’s. On September 29, 2004, two men knocked on the door of the residence of Helidoro Bautista and his wife, Consuelo, whom the men knew. Mr. Bautista identified defendant as one of the men who knocked. After entering, defendant put a gun to Mr. Bautista’s head and demanded and received money from him. Defendant also demanded that Mr. Bautista open his safe. When Bautista stated he could not remember the combination, defendant struck him several times with the weapon. Defendant gave a knife to the second assailant who placed it on Mrs. Bautista’s throat and threatened her if she failed to open the safe. Defendant took approximately $2,500 in cash, several pieces of jewelry, and numerous personal items.
At the August 26, 2003 change of plea hearing, defendant was properly advised by the court of the nature and consequences of his guilty plea pursuant to his plea bargain, and defense counsel stipulated to a factual basis for defendant’s plea based upon the preliminary hearing transcript and the police reports.
At sentencing the court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s request for a mitigated prison sentence.
Disposition
There are no arguable issues. The judgment is affirmed.
SIMONS, J.
We concur.
JONES, P.J.
GEMELLO, J.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney directory.
Analysis and review provided by Oceanside Property line Lawyers.
[1] The facts are taken from the probation report.
