P. v. Paopao
Defendant appeals from a judgment entered following his no contest plea to three counts of oral copulation by force or fear (Pen. Code, 288a, subd. (c)(2)) and his admission that he suffered a prior conviction of a serious or violent felony within the meaning of the Three Strikes law (Pen. Code, 1170.12, subds. (a) - (d) and 667, subds. (b) - (i)). Pursuant to the negotiated plea, he was sentenced to prison for a total of 48 years, consisting of three consecutive upper terms of eight years, doubled pursuant to the Three Strikes law.
Following appellants plea and before sentencing, defense counsel presented a report from a Dr. Knapke, a psychiatrist, who concluded that appellant was sane at the time of the offenses. Dr. Knapke observed that when appellant was arrested, he had marijuana in his system and was acutely intoxicated on methamphetamine. Dr. Knapke opined the drugs led to appellants behavior. Court have examined the entire record and are satisfied that no arguable issues exist and that appellant has, by virtue of counsels compliance with the Wende procedure and our review of the record, received adequate and effective appellate review of the judgment entered against him in this case. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 278; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 112-113.)
The judgment is affirmed.
Comments on P. v. Paopao