People v. Alford CA4/2 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  • Filed 6/18/14 P. v. Alford 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    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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,                                       E060237
    v.                                                                       (Super.Ct.No. RIF1312563)
    KENNETH DWAYNE ALFORD,                                                   OPINION
    Defendant and Appellant.
    APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Becky Dugan, Judge.
    Affirmed.
    Neil Auwarter, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
    Appellant.
    No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
    Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, defendant and appellant Kenneth
    Dwayne Alford pled guilty to grand theft of access card information (Pen. Code, § 484e,
    1
    subd. (d))1 and admitted that he had suffered a prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subds. (c)
    & (e)(1), 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)). In return, the remaining allegations were dismissed and
    defendant was sentenced to a stipulated term of 32 months in state prison with credit for
    time served. Defendant appeals from the judgment, challenging the sentence or other
    matters occurring after the plea. We find no error and affirm.
    I
    FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
    On October 30, 2013, defendant had credit cards or other types of access cards
    belonging to another person, and wanted to use those cards for his benefit.
    On November 1, 2013, a complaint was filed charging defendant with felony
    unlawfully acquiring and retaining access card account information belonging to another
    person with the intent to fraudulently use them (§ 484e, subd. (d); count 1); misdemeanor
    being under the influence of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11550;
    count 2); and misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia (Health & Saf. Code,
    § 11364.1; count 3). The complaint further alleged that defendant had sustained two
    prior prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (b)) and one prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subds. (c)
    & (e)(1), 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)). The complaint further alleged that defendant had
    violated the terms and conditions of his probation in case No. SWM1301772.
    On November 15, 2013, pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, defendant pled
    guilty to count 1 and admitted the prior strike allegation. In return, the remaining charges
    1   All future statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise stated.
    2
    and enhancement allegations would be dismissed and defendant would be sentenced to a
    stipulated term of 32 months in state prison with credit for time served. After examining
    defendant, the trial court found that defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his
    rights; that defendant understood the nature of the charges and the consequences of the
    plea; and that there was a factual basis for his plea. Defendant was thereafter
    immediately sentenced in accordance with his plea agreement and awarded a total of
    33 days of credit for time served.
    On December 6, 2013, defendant filed a notice of appeal, challenging the sentence
    or other matters occurring after the plea.
    II
    DISCUSSION
    After defendant appealed, 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 to
    conduct an independent review of the record.
    We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, and he
    has not done so.
    Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 
    40 Cal. 4th 106
    , we have
    independently reviewed the entire record for potential error and find no arguable error
    that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
    3
    III
    DISPOSITION
    The judgment is affirmed.
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
    RAMIREZ
    P. J.
    We concur:
    RICHLI
    J.
    MILLER
    J.
    4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: E060237

Filed Date: 6/18/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021