P. v. Diaz
Filed 3/1/13 P. v. Diaz CA4/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
CAMILA DIAZ,
Defendant and Appellant.
E056515
(Super.Ct.No. INF1102700)
OPINION
APPEAL
from the Superior Court of
County. Victoria E.
Cameron, Judge. Affirmed.
Jan
B. Norman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
No
appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
INTRODUCTION
On
January 31, 2012, an information alleged that defendant and appellant Camila
Diaz committed the crime of unlawfully
driving, taking, buying and receiving a vehicle that had been obtained by
theft under Penal Code section 666.5, while defendant had sustained a previous
conviction for unlawfully taking a vehicle under Vehicle Code section 10851,
subdivision (a), and grand theft involving a vehicle under Penal Code section
487, subdivision (3) (count 2).
information also alleged a prior strike offense under Penal Code section 211,
within the meaning of Penal Code sections 667, subdivisions (c) and (e)(1) and
1170.12, subdivision (c)(1). The
information further alleged that defendant had served a prior prison commitment
within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b).
On
May 9, 2012,
defendant filed a motion under People v.
Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13
Cal.4th 497, to dismiss her prior strike under Penal Code section 1385. The court denied the motion.
On
June 1, 2012,
defendant entered into a plea agreement.
She pled guilty to the charge of violating Penal Code section 666.5,
subdivision (a) (count 2) and admitted the prior strike allegation. Defendant waived her right to appeal.
On
the same day, the court sentenced defendant to prison for four years (the low
term of two years, doubled by the prior strike). The court also imposed a restitution fine of
$240, a $30 conviction fee, a $40 court security fee, and a $1,200 victim
restitution fee. The court awarded
presentence custody credit of 144
days. The prosecution’s motion to strike
the prior prison commitment allegation was granted.
On
June 18, 2012,
defendant filed a timely notice of appeal challenging the sentence or other
matters occurring after the plea.
Defendant did not file a request for certificate
of probable cause.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
On
November 18, 2011, a black Lexus was stolen from the parking lot at the Agua Caliente
Casino. The casino security surveillance
record revealed that defendant and her codefendant entered the vehicle with
defendant in the driver’s seat and her codefendant in the passenger’s
seat. The Lexus was driven out of the
parking structure by defendant.
Later
that same day, defendant and her codefendant were located by police officers
and detained. After receiving their
rights under Miranda v. Arizona
(1966) 384 U.S. 436, defendant and her codefendant admitted unlawfully taking the
black Lexus from the parking lot.
ANALYSIS
After defendant appealed, and
upon her request, this court appointed counsel to represent her. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority
of People
v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders
v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 setting forth a statement of the case, a
summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues, and requesting this court
to undertake a review of the entire record.
We
offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal
supplemental brief in both cases, but she has not done so. Pursuant to the mandate of
we have conducted an independent review
of the record and find no arguable issues.
DISPOSITION
The
judgment is affirmed.
NOT
TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
McKINSTER
Acting P. J.
We concur:
MILLER
J.
CODRINGTON
J.
name="_ftn1" title=""> [1] The information also alleged, as to
defendant’s codefendant Vicky Lynn Benitez only, a violation of Vehicle Code
section 10861, subdivision (a) (count 1).
name="_ftn2" title=""> [2] Defendant pled guilty prior to trial and there
is no probation report. The parties
stipulated to the preliminary hearing as the factual basis. There is no transcript of the preliminary
hearing on appeal. Therefore, like
defendant, we shall prepare the summary based on the statement of facts in the
prosecution’s opposition to defendant’s motion to strike her prior.
