P. v. Sweet
Filed 6/8/06 P. v. Sweet CA4/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. TRAVARUS SWEET, Defendant and Appellant. | D047542 (Super. Ct. No. SCD190756) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, George W. Clarke, Judge. Affirmed.
Travarus Sweet entered a negotiated guilty plea to three counts of residential burglary (Pen. Code, §§ 459/460), and one count of attempted residential burglary (Pen. Code, § 664/459). With the opportunity to litigate whether the prior convictions were strikes and a serious felony conviction under California law, Sweet admitted five prior Florida convictions alleged as prior strikes including one separately brought and tried as a prior serious felony conviction (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (a), (b)-(i), 1170.12, 668). At the sentencing hearing, the court found two of the Florida convictions were prior strikes and one was separately brought and tried as a prior serious felony conviction. It struck one prior strike and sentenced Sweet to prison for 19 years eight months: double the four year middle term on one conviction of residential burglary with a prior strike with consecutive terms of two years eight months on two other convictions of residential burglary with a prior strike and one year four months for attempted residential burglary with a prior strike (one-third the middle terms), enhanced five years for the prior serious felony conviction. The record does not include a certificate of probable cause. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 30(b).)
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief setting forth the evidence in the superior court. Counsel presents no argument for reversal but asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel refers to as a possible but not arguable issue whether the trial court erred in finding the Florida convictions prior strikes and a serious felony conviction.[1]
We granted Sweet permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not responded. A review of the entire record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, including the possible issues referred to pursuant to Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issue. Competent counsel has represented Sweet on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
McCONNELL, P. J.
WE CONCUR:
NARES, J.
O'ROURKE, J.
Publication Courtesy of San Diego County Legal Resource Directory.
Analysis and review provided by San Diego County Apartment Manager Lawyers.
[1] Because Sweet entered a guilty plea, he cannot challenge the facts underlying the convictions. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5; People v. Martin (1973) 9 Cal.3d 687, 693.) We need not recite the facts.
