Filed 4/21/21 P. v. Monarca CA2/6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

Jose Eduardo Monarca appeals the judgment entered after he pleaded guilty to continuous sexual abuse of a child under the age of 14 (Pen. Code,[1] § 288.5, subd. (a)), committing a forcible lewd act upon a child under the age of 14 (§ 288, subd. (b)(1)), penetration of a child with a foreign object (§ 289, subd. (j)), and six counts of committing a lewd act upon a child under the age of 14 (§ 288, subd. (a)). Pursuant to a negotiated disposition, the trial court sentenced appellant to an aggregate term of 25 years in state prison.

Because appellant pleaded guilty prior to trial, the relevant facts are derived from the transcript of the preliminary hearing. Over the course of several years, appellant sexually molested five minor children with whom he lived. All five victims were under the age of 14 when the abuse occurred.

We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. After counsel’s examination of the record, he filed a brief raising no issues. On January 21, 2020, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. Appellant subsequently filed a supplemental letter brief raising claims that challenge the validity of his guilty plea. Because appellant did not obtain a certificate of probable cause and expressly waived his right to appeal as part of his plea bargain, none of his claims present an arguable issue for review.

We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that appellant’s counsel has fully complied with his duties and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 443; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 126.)

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

PERREN, J.

We concur:

GILBERT, P.J. TANGEMAN, J.

Derek D. Malan, Judge

Superior Court County of Ventura

______________________________

Richard B. Lennon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

[1] All statutory references are to the Penal Code.