 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
People v. Mercado5/26/2004
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
Daniel Mercado entered a negotiated guilty plea to driving with a blood/alcohol level exceeding .08 percent (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (b)), and admitted enhancements which elevated the crime to a felony. Mercado also admitted a strike prior (Pen. Code, § 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, 668) and three prison priors (§§ 667.5, subd. (b), 668). The court denied a motion to withdraw the guilty plea and sentenced him to prison for a stipulated six years: double the three-year upper term for driving with a blood/alcohol level exceeding .08 percent with a strike prior. It struck the prior prison term enhancements. The court issued a certificate of probable cause. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 30(b), former rule 31(d).)
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief setting forth the evidence in the superior court. Counsel presents no argument for reversal but asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel refers to as possible but not arguable issues: (1) whether the court properly advised Mercado of his constitutional rights and whether he knowingly and voluntarily waived them before entering the guilty plea; (2) whether there is a sufficient factual basis for the guilty plea; and (3) whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying Mercado's motion to withdraw the guilty plea.
We granted Mercado permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not responded. A review of the entire record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, including the possible issues referred to pursuant to Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issue. Competent counsel has represented Mercado on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
WE CONCUR:
NARES, Acting P. J.
AARON, J.
Page 1 California DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|