Filed 7/23/26 P. v. Ayala CA4/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE,
D087605
Plaintiff and Respondent,
(Super. Ct. No. FERI2504036)
v.
ANGEL DE JESUS AYALA,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Riverside County,
Melissa Hale, Judge. Affirmed.
Charles Thomas Anderson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal,
for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.
Angel De Jesus Ayala was charged in three different cases with various
theft-related offenses as well as felony vandalism (Pen. Code § 594, subds.
(a), (b)(1)) and taking and driving a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)).
Ayala pleaded guilty to all of the charges in each of the three cases then
pending trial. The court gave an indication that the sentence would not
exceed 16 months in prison.
Prior to sentencing, Ayala argued his sentence should be ordered to be
served in local custody instead of state prison. The court rejected Ayala’s
contention and imposed a total sentence of 16 months to be served in prison.
Ayala filed a timely notice of appeal.
Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979)
25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) indicating counsel has not been able to identify any
arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to
independently review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We
advised Ayala of his right to file his own brief in this appeal. Ayala has not
responded to our notice.
DISCUSSION
As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks
the court to independently review the record for error. To assist the court in
its review and in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738
(Anders) counsel has identified a possible issue which was considered in
evaluating the potential merits of this appeal: whether the trial court erred
in rejecting Ayala’s argument that he should have been ordered to serve his
sentence in local custody instead of prison.
We have independently reviewed the record for error as required by
Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal
on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Ayala in this appeal.
2
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
HUFFMAN, J.
WE CONCUR:
DO, Acting P. J.
BUCHANAN, J.
Retired Associate Justice of the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate
District, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the
California Constitution.
3