P. v. Shaw









Filed 3/3/17 P. v. Shaw 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115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,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

WARREN SHAW,

Defendant and Appellant.

D071390



(Super. Ct. No. SCD 267675)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Michael S. Groch, Judge. Affirmed.
Leslie A. Rose, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Warren Shaw was charged with numerous counts and enhancing allegations, including the charge in count 1 that he committed corporal injury to a spouse or cohabitant (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a))[1] and that he had been convicted of a prior violation of section 273.5, subdivision (a) within the meaning of section 273.5, subdivision (f)(1). The complaint specially alleged Shaw had three prison priors within the meaning of sections 667.5, subdivision (b) and 668, and one strike prior within the meaning of sections 667, subdivisions (b) though (i), 1170.12, and 668.
Shaw entered into a plea bargain pursuant to which he pled guilty to count 1 and admitted the prior strike conviction and one of the prison priors, in exchange for a stipulated five-year term in state prison and dismissal of the remaining charges and allegations. However, when he subsequently appeared for sentencing, Shaw made an oral Marsden motion[2] and also requested that his guilty plea be withdrawn. The trial court denied both motions and then sentenced him to the stipulated five-year term.
Shaw timely filed a notice of appeal. We affirm the judgment.
FACTS
At a September 27, 2016 proceeding, Shaw admitted that he unlawfully inflicted a corporal injury resulting in a traumatic condition on his girlfriend, Margaret R., and did so after having been previously convicted of this same offense. He also admitted he had served a prison term for a prior conviction of a section 273.5, subdivision (a) offense, and that such prior conviction constituted a "strike." As part of the plea agreement, Shaw waived certain appellate rights.
When Shaw appeared for sentencing one month later, he made an oral Marsden motion. Following in camera proceedings to assess the grounds for that motion, the court denied the motion. Shaw also sought to withdraw his guilty plea, but admitted there were no changed circumstances or newly discovered facts since the time he entered his plea. Accordingly, the court denied that motion as well. The court then sentenced Shaw to the stipulated five-year term.
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief summarizing the facts and proceedings below. Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738. Counsel identifies, as possible issues, whether the waiver of certain appellate rights was valid, whether the court abused its discretion in denying Shaw's request to withdraw his guilty plea, whether Shaw was deprived of effective assistance of counsel when his attorney declined to file a motion to withdraw the guilty plea, and whether the court abused its discretion in denying his Marsden motion. Additionally, although Shaw apparently neither sought nor obtained a certificate of probable cause, counsel also identifies as a possible issue whether Shaw's guilty plea was constitutionally valid. However, counsel presents no argument for reversal on these issues.
We granted Shaw permission to file a supplemental brief on his own behalf, but he has not responded. A review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738 has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issues. Shaw has been competently represented by counsel on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.



DATO, J.

WE CONCUR:




McCONNELL, P. J.




O'ROURKE, J.





Publication Courtesy of San Diego County Legal Resource Directory.
Analysis and review provided by San Diego County Property line attorney.
San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com


[1] All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise noted.
[2] People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118.