People v. Bibbs CA2/7 ( 2022 )


Menu:
  • Filed 2/2/22 P. v. Bibbs CA2/7
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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    has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SEVEN
    THE PEOPLE,                                                  B313097
    Plaintiff and Respondent,                           (Los Angeles County
    Super. Ct. No. VA134204)
    v.
    BRANDON LEON BIBBS,
    Defendant and Appellant.
    APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of
    Los Angeles County, Lillian Vega Jacobs, Judge. Affirmed.
    Brandon Leon Bibbs, in pro. per.; and Jack T. Weedin,
    under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
    Appellant.
    No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.
    ___________
    After the superior court denied Brandon Leon Bibbs’s
    motion to suppress evidence pursuant to Penal Code
    section 1538.5, Bibbs pleaded no contest to one count of first
    degree automated teller machine (ATM) robbery (Pen. Code,
    §§ 211, 212, subd. (b)) and admitted he had personally used a
    firearm during the commission of the offense (Pen. Code,
    § 12022.53, subd. (b)). Pursuant to the terms of a negotiated
    agreement, the court dismissed 10 additional counts of robbery
    and one count of attempted robbery and sentenced Bibbs to a
    state prison term of 14 years (the middle term of four years for
    first degree robbery plus 10 years for the firearm-use
    enhancement).
    No arguable issues were identified by Bibbs’s appointed
    appellate counsel after his review of the record. We also have
    identified no arguable issues after our own independent review of
    the record and analysis of the contentions presented by Bibbs in
    his handwritten supplemental brief. We affirm.
    FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
    A “felony complaint for arrest warrant” charging Bibbs
    with 12 counts of second degree robbery, committed between
    November 11, 2012 and January 18, 2014, was prepared and
    signed by a deputy district attorney. The superior court’s
    minute orders state the complaint was filed March 12, 2014.
    Judge Leland H. Tipton authorized issuance of an arrest warrant
    on March 17, 2014.
    Bibbs’s case was called for arraignment on April 25, 2016
    and continued to May 31, 2016. On May 31, 2016 Bibbs,
    represented by private counsel, waived arraignment, reading of
    the complaint and a statement of his constitutional and statutory
    rights and pleaded not guilty to each of the 12 counts.
    2
    The felony complaint was amended twice and ultimately
    charged Bibbs with one count of attempted first degree ATM
    robbery, two counts of first degree ATM robbery and 11 counts of
    second degree robbery. At the preliminary hearing, after the
    magistrate judge denied as untimely Bibbs’s request to represent
    himself, the court found the evidence presented (with
    enhancements) was sufficient as to 10 of the counts charged.
    The information filed January 31, 2017 charged Bibbs with
    one count of attempted first degree robbery, two counts of
    first degree robbery and nine counts of second degree robbery.
    He was arraigned on the information the same day. After
    multiple continuances, on April 19, 2019 Bibbs waived his right
    to counsel and exercised his right to represent himself.
    On February 20, 2020 Bibbs, representing himself, filed a
    handwritten motion pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5 to
    suppress identification evidence based on illegal arrest, asserting
    he had been arrested without a warrant and, therefore, his post-
    arrest identification by the robbery victims was unlawful. In
    support Bibbs argued the original felony complaint on which he
    was arraigned had never been filed, the second amended felony
    complaint lacked the required verification by the investigating
    officer, and his arrest was not supported by probable cause. At
    the February 27, 2020 hearing on his motion, in response to the
    court’s questions Bibbs succinctly explained his theory that his
    arrest was unlawful, “There was no felony complaint to show any
    probable cause for the charges in reference to any authorization.”
    The court responded that the court file contained a felony
    complaint filed March 12, 2014, which authorized the issuance of
    an arrest warrant, and a copy of the document had been made
    and provided to Bibbs. The court denied the motion.
    3
    On August 21, 2020 Bibbs filed a motion to reconsider his
    motion to suppress identification evidence. The court denied the
    motion on September 4, 2020, explaining the motion to reconsider
    did not contain any new or different facts or law from those
    previously presented to the court. On April 6, 2021 Bibbs filed
    another motion to reconsider his suppression motion. The court
    again denied the motion, stating at the hearing, “I am familiar
    with the issues and the legal argument you have made
    previously, Mr. Bibbs. And I don’t see anything [new] articulated
    in your motion.”
    On June 11, 2021, after Bibbs relinquished his right to
    represent himself, and following discussions between the
    prosecutor and defense counsel, Bibbs entered a plea of no
    contest to count 5 of the information, which charged first degree
    ATM robbery, and admitted he had personally used a firearm
    when committing the offense. On June 15, 2021 the trial court
    sentenced Bibbs to a state prison term of 14 years with credit for
    2,163 days (1,881 actual days and 282 days of custody credit).
    Pursuant to the negotiated agreement all remaining counts and
    enhancements were dismissed.
    Bibbs filed a timely notice of appeal.
    DISCUSSION
    We appointed counsel to represent Bibbs on appeal. After
    reviewing the record, counsel filed a brief raising no issues.
    Appointed counsel advised Bibbs on January 4, 2022 that he
    could personally submit any contentions or issue he wanted the
    court to consider.
    On January 24, 2022 we received a two-page handwritten
    supplemental brief in which Bibbs simply restated, without
    elaboration, his contention his motion to suppress evidence of his
    4
    post-arrest identification by the robbery victims should have been
    granted because there was no reason for his arrest and he was
    not arrested pursuant to a validly issued arrest warrant. Bibbs
    provided no basis for this court to determine the trial court erred
    in finding a felony complaint authorizing issuance of a warrant
    for his arrest had been properly prepared and filed in the case.
    We have examined the record and are satisfied Bibbs’s
    appointed appellate counsel has fully complied with the
    responsibilities of counsel and no arguable issue exists. (Smith v.
    Robbins (2000) 
    528 U.S. 259
    , 277-284; People v. Kelly (2006)
    
    40 Cal.4th 106
    , 118-119; People v. Wende (1979) 
    25 Cal.3d 436
    ,
    441-442.)
    DISPOSITION
    The judgment is affirmed.
    PERLUSS, P. J.
    We concur:
    SEGAL, J.
    FEUER, J.
    5
    

Document Info

Docket Number: B313097

Filed Date: 2/2/2022

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 2/2/2022