>P. v. Roland



















Filed 3/30/10 P. v. Roland CA5







NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE
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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT






>

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. BRIANT ROLAND, Defendant and Appellant.

F058284 (Super. Ct. No. 09CM1062) >OPINION

THE COURT^*



APPEAL
from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kings County. Louis F. Bissig, Judge.

Deborah
Prucha, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Office
of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and
Respondent.



>-ooOoo-

STATEMENT OF THE
CASE

On May 7, 2009, appellant, Briant Roland, was charged in
an information with felony corporal punishment or injury on a child (Pen. Code,
§ 273d, subd. (a), count one),^[1] misdemeanor battery on a person in a dating
relationship with appellant (§ 243, subd. (e)(1), count two), and
misdemeanor possession of not more than 28.5 grams of marijuana (Health &
Saf. Code, § 11357, subd. (b), count three). There was also an allegation that appellant
had served a prior prison term within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision
(b).

On May 22, 2009, appellant waived his constitutional rights pursuant to >Boykin/Tahl.^[2] The court advised appellant of the
consequences of admitting the allegations.
Appellant agreed that the evidence presented at the preliminary hearing
constituted a factual basis for his plea.^[3] Appellant pled guilty to count one. The remaining counts and the enhancement were
dismissed.

On June 23, 2009, the court conducted a >Marsden hearing.^[4] Appellant claimed defense counsel told him he
had a â€