P. v. Mejia
Filed 10/16/07 P. v. Mejia 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. GABRIEL VALENZUELA MEJIA, Defendant and Appellant. | E043000 (Super.Ct.No. INF055143) OPINION |
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. James S. Hawkins, Judge. Affirmed.
Anna M. Jauregui, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
In case No. INF055143, filed by the District Attorney of Riverside County, defendant was charged with first degree murder, (Pen. Code, 187, subd. (a), 189, 190)[1](count one) and with personally discharging a firearm and causing death ( 12022.53, subd. (d), 1192.7, subd.(c)(8)).
On January 31, 2007, pursuant to sections 859a and 1192.7, defendant, represented by counsel, pled guilty to count two of the amended complaint (second degree murder, 187) and admitted the personal use allegation filed pursuant to section 12022.5, subdivision (a). In accordance with the negotiated disposition, defendant was committed to state prison for an aggregate term of 25 years to life and in case No. INF036636 probation was revoked and terminated.
Statement of Facts
There was no preliminary hearing or probation report. The facts are based on the factual basis stipulated to at the guilty plea hearing: I shot Orlando Lopez with a handgun without justification under the law, resulting in his unlawful death.
Defendant appealed, and upon his request this court appointed counsel to represent him. 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 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493] 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 the defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.
We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
Disposition
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
RAMIREZ
P.J.
We concur:
McKINSTER
J.
GAUT
J.
Publication courtesy of California pro bono legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by La Mesa Property line Lawyers.
[1] All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
