P. v. >Moore>
Filed 2/15/13 P. v. Moore CA4/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF >CALIFORNIA>
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff
and Respondent,
v.
MICHAEL ROBERT MOORE,
Defendant
and Appellant.
E057095
(Super.Ct.No.
FVI1200381)
OPINION
APPEAL
from the Superior Court
of href="http://www.adrservices.org/neutrals/frederick-mandabach.php">San Bernardino
County. Steve Malone,
Judge. Affirmed.
Rex
Williams, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
No
appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Pursuant
to a plea agreement, defendant and appellant Michael Robert Moore pled no
contest to unlawfully taking or driving a
vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), and admitted that he had suffered
one prior strike conviction (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds.
(a)-(d)). In exchange, the remaining
allegations were dismissed, and defendant was sentenced to a stipulated term of
four years in state prison with credit for time served. Defendant appeals from the judgment,
challenging the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea, as well as
the validity of the plea or admission.
We find no error and affirm.
FACTUAL
AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On
or about February 11, 2012,
defendant unlawfully took and drove a vehicle owned by another person without
her permission or consent and with the intent to deprive her possession of the
vehicle.
On
April 20, 2012, an amended
felony complaint was filed charging defendant with possession of a controlled
substance for sale, to wit, heroin (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351, count
1) for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with a criminal
street gang (Pen. Code, § 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(A)); unlawfully driving or
taking a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a), count 2) for the benefit of,
at the direction of, or in association with a criminal street gang (Pen. Code,
§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(A)); and actively participating in a href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.com/">criminal street gang (Pen. Code, §
186.22, subd. (a), count 3). The amended
complaint further alleged that defendant had suffered three prior prison terms
(Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)), one prior serious felony (Pen. Code, § 667,
subd. (a)(1)), one prior strike conviction (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds.
(b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)), and one prior drug-related conviction
(Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.2, subd. (a)).
On
May 14, 2012, pursuant to a
plea agreement, defendant pled no contest to count 2 and admitted he had
suffered a prior strike conviction in exchange for a stipulated four-year
sentence and the dismissal of the remaining allegations. The trial court found that the no contest
plea and admission were entered into freely and voluntarily and that defendant
knowingly and intelligently waived his rights.
Defendant thereafter waived a probation report, and requested sentencing
be held at a later date.
The
sentencing hearing was held on August
24, 2012. At that time,
defendant informed the court that he had been accepted in a long-term
residential treatment program, and made an oral motion to withdraw his guilty
plea. After the trial court denied the
motion, defendant was sentenced in accordance with his plea agreement and
awarded credit for time served.
Defendant
filed a notice of appeal, challenging the sentence or other matters occurring
after the plea, as well as the validity of the plea or admission, and a request
for certificate of probable cause. The
trial court denied the request for certificate
of probable cause.
DISCUSSION
Defendant
appealed and, upon his request, this court appointed counsel to represent
him. Counsel has filed a brief under the
authority of People v. Wende (1979)
25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California
(1967) 386 U.S. 738, setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the
facts and potential arguable issues, and requesting this court conduct an
independent review of the record.
We
offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal
supplemental brief, but he has not done so.
Pursuant to the mandate of People
v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have independently reviewed the record
for potential error and find no arguable issues.
DISPOSITION
The
judgment is affirmed.
NOT
TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
RAMIREZ
P.
J.
We concur:
RICHLI
J.
MILLER
J.