People v. Spencer CA4/1 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  • Filed 6/2/14 P. v. Spencer 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    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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,                                                         D064819
    Plaintiff and Respondent,
    v.                                                         (Super. Ct. No. SCD246752)
    NATHAN J. SPENCER,
    Defendant and Appellant.
    APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Dwayne
    K. Moring, Judge. Affirmed.
    Nathan J. Spencer, in pro. per.; Lynelle K. Hee, under appointment by the Court of
    Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
    Nathan J. Spencer appeals from the judgment following his guilty plea. Appointed
    appellate counsel filed a brief presenting no argument for reversal, but inviting this court
    to review the record for error in accordance with People v. Wende (1979) 
    25 Cal.3d 436
    (Wende). Spencer has responded to our invitation to file a supplemental brief. After
    having independently reviewed the entire record for error as required by Anders v.
    California (1967) 
    386 U.S. 738
     (Anders) and Wende, we affirm.
    I
    FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
    In March 2013, Spencer was charged with petty theft with a prior theft offense
    (Pen. Code, §§ 484, 666)1 and possession of a controlled substance (§ 11377, subd. (a)).
    The information further alleged five prison priors and two prior strikes. According to the
    probation officer's report, the petty theft involved taking a package from outside a
    residence.
    In April 2013, Spencer pled guilty to the petty theft count and admitted he had a
    prior theft offense conviction. The plea agreement included a stipulation to a three-year
    sentence, and Spencer specifically gave up his right to appeal the stipulated sentence. In
    accordance with the plea agreement, the trial court sentenced Spencer to three years in
    prison.
    II
    DISCUSSION
    Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief summarizing the facts and
    proceedings in the trial court. Counsel presented no argument for reversal but invited this
    court to review the record for error in accordance with Wende, supra, 
    25 Cal.3d 436
    .
    Pursuant to Anders, 
    supra,
     
    386 U.S. 738
    , counsel identified as possible but not arguable
    1         All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
    2
    issues: (1) whether Spencer was properly advised of his constitutional rights,
    consequences of pleading guilty, and did he voluntarily waive them; and (2) whether
    there was a sufficient factual basis established for the guilty plea.
    After we received counsel's brief, we gave Spencer an opportunity to file a
    supplemental brief. Spencer responded, attaching to his response an April 30, 2014
    article from the Los Angeles Times about Governor Jerry Brown's recent decision to
    release some low-level, nonviolent prisoners to comply with a federal court order to
    reduce prison overcrowding. Spencer contends that he should obtain early release under
    that program. Although we understand Spencer's argument, the issue he raises is beyond
    the scope of this appeal. The early release program that Spencer references was
    developed after Spencer was convicted and sentenced in this matter, and is not within the
    scope of the issues decided by the trial court. We express no view on whether Spencer is
    eligible for the Governor's early release program.
    Spencer also contends that his three-year sentence was "excessive." However, this
    argument lacks merit because, as we have explained, Spencer specifically gave up his
    right to challenge the stipulated sentence.
    A review of the record pursuant to Wende, supra, 
    25 Cal.3d 436
    , and Anders,
    
    supra,
     
    386 U.S. 738
    , including the issues suggested by counsel and by Spencer, has
    disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issue. Spencer has been adequately
    represented by counsel on this appeal.
    3
    DISPOSITION
    The judgment is affirmed.
    IRION, J.
    WE CONCUR:
    HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.
    HALLER, J.
    4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: D064819

Filed Date: 6/2/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014