People v. Crowder CA2/5 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  • Filed 10/31/13 P. v. Crowder CA2/5
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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 FIVE
    THE PEOPLE,                                                          B247921
    Plaintiff and Respondent,                                   (Los Angeles County
    Super. Ct. No. BA395785)
    v.
    HERMAN CROWDER,
    Defendant and Appellant.
    APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Barbara
    R. Johnson, Judge. Affirmed.
    Christine C. Shaver, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
    Appellant.
    No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
    Pursuant to a plea agreement, appellant pled guilty to robbery (Pen. Code, § 211)1
    and no contest to committing criminal threats (§ 422, subd. (a)). In addition appellant
    admitted he committed the robbery for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association
    with a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)). Appellant also admitted he had a
    prior qualifying felony conviction for robbery as a juvenile under the Three Strikes Law
    (§ 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)). Approximately one month later, at his sentencing hearing,
    appellant made a motion to withdraw his plea. The motion was denied and he was
    sentenced, pursuant to the plea agreement, to 14 years 4 months in state prison.
    FACTS
    Colin Smith lived with his girlfriend Deborah Contreras. Appellant, an admitted
    Black P. Stones gang member, went to their apartment accompanied by fellow gang
    members. Appellant had engaged in a gang-related altercation with Contreras’s brother
    the previous day. Appellant arrived at the apartment carrying a semiautomatic handgun.
    Appellant demanded $400 or he would kill Contreras’s brother, as well as everyone in the
    house. The family came up with $200 and appellant left, indicating their safety was not
    guaranteed. Smith and Contreras were so frightened by the incident that they moved out
    of the apartment.
    DISCUSSION
    The court appointed counsel to represent appellant on appeal. On September 12,
    2013, appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 
    25 Cal. 3d 436
    (Wende) raising no contentions but requesting this court independently review the record
    for arguable issues. On October 10, 2013, appellant filed a document that we treat as a
    supplemental brief. Appellant appears to contend his prior robbery conviction could not
    be used to increase his sentence under the Three Strikes Law because he was a juvenile
    1
    All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise noted.
    2
    when it was committed. He additionally challenges the sufficiency of the evidence
    against him and requests a reduction in his sentence.
    Appellant’s prior conviction for robbery qualified as a prior felony conviction
    under the Three Strikes Law despite, the fact that he was a juvenile when it was
    committed. (§§ 667, subd. (d)(3), 1170.12, subd. (b)(3); see Welf. & Inst. Code, § 601 et
    seq; People v. Nguyen (2009) 
    46 Cal. 4th 1007
    , 1022.) Appellant may not challenge the
    sufficiency of the evidence against him because by pleading guilty/no contest to the
    offenses he admitted all of the elements of the crime. (People v. Stanworth (1974) 
    11 Cal. 3d 588
    , 605; People v. Suite (1980) 
    101 Cal. App. 3d 680
    , 689.) He has provided no
    authority to justify the reduction in his sentence. (Keyes v. Bowen (2010) 
    189 Cal. App. 4th 647
    , 655-656 [appellant is required to present legal authority in support of
    each issue raised].)
    We have independently examined the entire record on appeal. There are no
    arguable issues. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 
    528 U.S. 259
    , 284.)
    3
    DISPOSITION
    The judgment is affirmed.
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
    KUMAR, J.*
    We concur:
    TURNER, P. J.
    KRIEGLER, J.
    *
    Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to
    article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
    4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: B247921

Filed Date: 10/31/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014