P. v. Hynes
Filed 2/26/10 P. v. Hynes CA2/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. BARRIAN HYNES, Defendant and Appellant. | B219156 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NA082184) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Richard R. Romero, Judge. Affirmed.
Jonathan B. Steiner and Richard B. Lennon, under appointments by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Barrian Hynes appeals from the judgment entered following his no contest plea to one count of robbery (Pen. Code, 211) and his admission that he suffered a prior conviction for a serious or violent felony within the meaning of the Three Strikes law (Pen. Code, 1170.12, suds. (a) (d); 667, subds. (b) (i)) and a serious felony within the meaning of Penal Code section 667, subdivision (a)(1).[1] He was sentenced to prison for nine years, consisting of the low term of two years, doubled to four years by reason of his prior strike conviction, plus five years for the serious felony enhancement. He appealed challenging the validity of his plea, claiming, inter alia, his attorney wrongly advised him to take a deal, failed to adequately explain things to him and failed to investigate his case. He requested but was denied a certificate of probable cause.
The evidence at the preliminary hearing established that on May 30, 2009, at approximately 2:30 p.m., appellant and two companions entered a clothing store on South Street in Long Beach. They selected merchandise from the store and attempted to negotiate the price with the cashier. When they were unable to agree on the price, they left the store without paying, taking the items with them. The store manager tried to prevent the men from leaving and one of the men pushed the manager, knocking him down onto the concrete floor. A security guard attempted to detain one of the suspects until the police arrived but was prevented from doing so by another one of the suspects.
After review of the record, appellants court-appointed counsel filed an opening brief requesting this court to independently review the record pursuant to the holding of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.
On December 4, 2009, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that no arguable issues exist, and that appellant has, by virtue of counsels compliance with the Wende procedure and our review of the record, received adequate and effective appellate review of the judgment entered against him in this case. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 278; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 112-113.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
WILLHITE, Acting P.J.
We concur:
MANELLA, J.
SUZUKAWA, J.
Publication courtesy of California free legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Carlsbad Property line attorney.
San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com
[1] Pursuant to his negotiated plea, one count of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, 211), one count of petty theft with priors (Pen. Code, 666), and two counts of resisting, obstructing, delaying of a peace officer (Pen. Code, 148, subd. (a)(1)) were dismissed as were allegations of another strike conviction and another prior serious felony conviction.
