P. v. Benavides
Filed 4/28/06 P. v. Benavides CA1/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 FOUR
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RENE ORLANDO BENAVIDES, Defendant and Appellant. | A109827 (San Mateo County Super. Ct. No. SC043796) |
Defendant appeals from an order denying his motion to have his felony conviction reduced to a misdemeanor and for expungement of the conviction. He claims that the judge who ruled on his motion did not have jurisdiction to do so and that the trial court abused its discretion in denying him relief. We disagree and affirm.
I. Factual and Procedural Background
The record in this matter is sparse, making a meaningful summary of the relevant facts somewhat difficult. Defendant was charged by information on October 21, 1998, with six charges, one of which was a felony count of unlawful infliction of corporal injury on defendant's spouse (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a)––count 1).[1] As to that count, the information also alleged, pursuant to former section 273.55, that defendant had been convicted within the previous seven years of a misdemeanor charge of unlawful infliction of corporal injury on his spouse (§ 273.5, subd. (a)). Former section 273.55 exposed defendant to a greater maximum sentence for conviction on count 1, and it mandated certain conditions if probation was granted. (Stats. 1994, ch. 873, § 1.)
On November 30, 1998, defendant pleaded no contest to count I pursuant to a plea agreement and admitted the special allegation pursuant to former section 273.55. The plea agreement provided that the remaining charges against defendant would be dismissed, that he would not be sentenced to state prison except under certain specified contingencies, and that he would be sentenced to no more than one year in county jail. Defendant stated that he did not waive his right to be sentenced by the judge taking his plea; â€
