P. v. Stewart
Filed 9/25/07 P. v. Stewart 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JERMAINE ANDREW STEWART, Defendant and Appellant. | E042591 (Super.Ct.No. FSB047671) OPINION |
APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Kenneth Barr, Judge. Affirmed with directions.
Anita P. Jog, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant pled guilty to second degree robbery (Pen. Code, 211)[1]and committing elder abuse ( 368, subd. (b)(1) and admitted having suffered a strike prior. ( 667, subd.(b)-(i).) As part of his plea bargain, he agreed to an eight year prison term and he waived his right to appeal. Following denial of his motion to withdraw his plea, he was sentenced to the agreed-to term. There is no certificate of probable cause in the record before us.
Defendant appealed, and upon his request this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende(1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493] setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record.
We offered the defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which has been read and considered.
Facts
Defendant stole a purse from a thin, frail 72- year-old woman in the parking lot of a grocery store. When the victim tried to retrieve her purse, defendant pushed her backwards.
Defendants Contentions
In his one and one-half page hand printed personal supplemental brief, defendant contends that his did not commit these crimes. However, he waived such an assertion by pleading guilty. (People v. Hunter (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 37, 42.)
Defendant also repeats the matters he asserted below in his unsuccessful motion to withdraw his plea, i.e., that he did not know what he was doing when he entered his plea and he thought his prison sentence was a suspended one. The trial courts conclusion that defendant failed to demonstrate either assertion below was based on its implied finding that defendants claims were not credible, a matter we may not disturb because it is supported by substantial evidence. (See People v. Fairbank (1997) 16 Cal.4th 1223, 1254; People v. Ravaux (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 914, 917.)
Moreover, defendants claims are foreclosed by his waiver of his right to appeal and his failure to obtain a certificate of probable cause. (People v. Mendez (1999) 19 Cal.4th1084, 1100; People v. Panizzon (1996) 13 Cal.4th 68, 78, 86.)
We have now concluded out independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
Disposition
The trial court is directed to amend the abstract of judgment and minutes of the sentencing hearing to indicate that defendant was sentenced pursuant to Penal Code section 667, subdivisions (b)-(i). In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
RAMIREZ
P.J.
We concur:
HOLLENHORST
J.
MILLER
J.
Publication Courtesy of San Diego County Legal Resource Directory.
Analysis and review provided by El Cajon Property line Lawyers.
[1] All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
