P. v. Miller
Filed 9/14/06 P. v. Miller CA1/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. EPHRIEM MILLER, Defendant and Appellant. | A111987 (San Mateo County Super. Ct. No. SC057995) |
Introduction
Appellant Ephriem Miller entered a plea of no contest to charges of first and second degree burglary, grand theft, and theft from an elder or dependent person. Miller also admitted he has three prior felonies, he knew his victim was over 65 years old, and he committed the current offenses while on bail. Miller was convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of 16 years in state prison. He appeals, and asks this court, pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, to examine the record and determine if it reveals any issues that deserve further briefing. We have done so, find none, and affirm the judgment.
Background
According to the probation department report, Miller and his brother appeared at the house of an elderly man who recognized Miller because Miller had done some painting work for him in the past. The victim stated Miller and his brother told him he needed roofing work, which they could do for $12,800. They drove the victim to San Francisco, where they went from bank to bank attempting to get money. Finally, the victim obtained two cashier's checks from Citibank. Appellant and his brother were arrested when they returned to the victim's house. Police had already responded to a call from the victim's daughter that her father was missing, and subsequently learned the daughter received a telephone message from a bank in San Francisco informing her that her father was in the bank attempting to withdraw a large sum of money.
After a preliminary hearing on January 26, 2005, Miller was charged by Information filed on February 8, 2005. On May 31, 2005, after a full advisement of his constitutional rights and the consequences of his plea, appellant pleaded no contest to all charges and admitted all allegations in the Information. Specifically, appellant acknowledged that it was an â€
