Filed 9/21/17 P. v. Lacey CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Sheila F. Hanson, Judge. Affirmed.

Cindy Brines, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

* * *

Useplatique Monk Lacey pleaded guilty to grand theft (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (a); all statutory citations are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated), vandalism (§ 594, subds. (a), (b)(1)), and misdemeanor resisting a peace officer (§ 148, subd. (a)(1)). Lacey also admitted suffering eight prior convictions within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b), and the trial court found he had suffered a prior conviction under the “Three Strikes” law (§§ 667, subds. (d) & (e)(1), 1170.12, subds (b) & (c)(1)). Lacey appealed, and his appointed counsel filed a brief under the procedures outlined in People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738.[1] Because our independent review of the record discloses no arguable issues, we affirm the judgment.

I

Facts and Procedural History

Buena Park Police Officer Bryan Johnson testified at the January 2016 preliminary hearing (Whitman v. Superior Court (1991) 54 Cal.3d 1063). Lacey entered a Walmart store on December 16, 2015, broke the hinges on a display case, stole multiple iPods, and left the store without paying. He refused a police officer’s command to stop. Officers eventually detained and arrested him. The approximate value of the iPods was $1,133. The estimate to replace the display case was approximately $1,500.

In January 2016, the Orange County District Attorney filed an information charging the offenses and enhancements noted above. Lacey pleaded not guilty and denied the special allegations. In February 2016, Lacey was found unsuitable for referral to the mental health collaborative court. In March 2016, the trial court granted Lacey’s request to represent himself, and appointed an investigator for him. In August 2016, the court denied Lacey’s request for discovery of confidential peace officer personnel records. In October 2016, the court denied Lacey’s motion to reduce the offenses to misdemeanors. (§ 1170.18, subd. (f).) In October 2016, the court appointed psychologist Dr. Laura Brodie (Evid. Code, § 730) to evaluate Lacey’s mental health and prepare a confidential report. Brodie filed her report in early November. Also in November, Lacey entered a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity (NGI). The court appointed Brodie and Dr. Roberto De Apodaca to interview and examine Lacey concerning his insanity plea. (§§ 1026, 1027.)

In December 2016, Lacey withdrew his NGI plea. On December 20, 2016, Lacey executed a waiver of rights and guilty plea form and pleaded guilty to the charged offenses and admitted the section 667.5, subdivision (b), allegations. Lacey waived his right to a jury trial on the Three Strikes law prior, and the court set a trial date.

On February 24, 2017, the court conducted a bench trial on the Three Strikes law allegation and found the allegation to be true. The court denied Lacey’s motion to dismiss the strike and (§ 1385; People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497, 504.) imposed a four-year prison sentence, comprised of the two-year midterm for grand theft, doubled because of the strike. The court also imposed a concurrent six-month term for resisting arrest and imposed and stayed a two-year concurrent midterm for vandalism.[2] The court struck punishment for the section 667.5, subdivision (b), enhancements. The court awarded Lacey custody and conduct credit totaling 880 days. The court imposed various fines, fees and assessments, and reserved jurisdiction to award victim restitution.

In March 2017, Lacey filed a notice of appeal in propria persona and requested a certificate of probable cause. He asserted the trial court “allowed . . . records outside the ‘record of conviction’ to be [admitted in evidence] without authentication or attestation,” and “allowed [the] prosecutor to proceed without proving identity.” A staff attorney at Appellate Defender’s Inc. filed an amended notice of appeal reflecting the appeal was based on the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea, and also challenged the validity of the plea. On April 20, 2017, the trial court filed an order certifying that Lacey lacked probable cause for an appeal from his guilty plea and admission of the section 667.5, subdivision (b) allegations, but there was good cause (§ 1237.5) for an appeal from the strike finding and sentence.

II

Following Wende guidelines, we have reviewed counsel’s brief and the appellate record. To assist the court in its review and in compliance with Anders, counsel identified a possible issue for our consideration: Whether sufficient evidence supported the trial court’s finding Lacey suffered a strike prior. We have reviewed the entire record under the guidelines of Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738, and have not identified any arguable issues that would result in a disposition more favorable to Lacey. We offered Lacey an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, and he has not done so. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106.)

The judgment is affirmed.

ARONSON, J.

WE CONCUR:

O’LEARY, P. J.

THOMPSON, J.