P.v. Armstrong
Filed 8/21/12 P.v. Armstrong CA2/2
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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115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
SECOND
APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION
TWO
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
LARRY ARMSTRONG,
Defendant and Appellant.
B240041
(Los Angeles
County
Super. Ct.
No. MA053482)
THE COURT:
Appellant
Larry Armstrong appeals from the judgment entered following his plea of no
contest to one count of first degree
residential burglary with a person present in violation of Penal Code
section 459. The trial court sentenced
appellant to 23 years in state prison, which consisted of the upper term of six
years doubled to 12 years based on appellant’s admission of a prior burglary
“strike†under Penal Code section 1170.12, subdivisions (a)-(d), plus 11 years
based on appellant’s admission of two prior serious felony convictions pursuant
to Penal Code section 667, subdivision (a)(1).
Appellant was ordered to pay fines and fees.
The
judgment was filed on October 20,
2011. On November 22, 2011, appellant filed a
motion to withdraw his plea on the grounds that he was not arraigned within
48 hours of his arrest, he was not competent at the time he made his plea
because he was taking “psych-medications,†and he received ineffective
assistance of counsel because his attorney did not properly negotiate his plea. The court heard the motion on December 20, 2011, with appellant
and his attorney present. The court
treated the motion as one filed under People
v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118, and denied it. On December
29, 2011, appellant filed the same motion, which the court took off
calendar. The court notified appellant
of its action by letter dated January
17, 2012. Apparently,
appellant refiled his original motion.
The court took no action on the motion, as indicated by minute order
dated February 7, 2012. On February
22, 2011, appellant filed a notice of appeal and requested a
certificate of probable cause to challenge the denial of his plea withdrawal
motion. The trial court granted the
certificate of probable cause on March
9, 2012.
We
appointed counsel to represent
appellant on this appeal. After
examination of the record, counsel filed an “Opening Brief†in which no
arguable issues were raised. On May 30, 2012, we advised appellant
that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues
that he wished us to consider. No
response has been received to date.
We have examined the entire record
and conclude that it provides a factual basis to support the conviction. Testimony given at the
John Amis of the Lancaster Station Patrol established that appellant was seen
by an occupant of a residence walking away from the residence pulling an air
compressor that had been in the garage.
Appellant did not have permission to take the compressor. The occupant and her mother, who was also in
the residence at the time, followed appellant on the sidewalk. The mother told appellant, “Hey, stop. That’s my compressor.†Appellant responded that he had bought the
compressor from someone else. He then
released it and walked away until he was arrested.
Additionally, we have reviewed the
sealed transcript on the Marsden
hearing, and find no error in the denial of the motion to withdraw the plea.
We are satisfied that appellant’s
attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no
v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE
OFFICIAL REPORTS.
name="_ftn1" title="">* BOREN, P. J., DOI TODD, J.,
ASHMANN-GERST, J.
