People v. Jackson CA4/1
- Proceeding
- appeal from a judgment
- Trial court
- Superior Court of San Diego County · No. SCD298514, SCD298799
- Trial judge
- Dwayne K. Moring
- Outcome
- affirmed — Affirmed.
- Area
- criminal
- Panel
- Richard D. Huffman, Sr. (author), Laurence D. Rubin, Joan K. Irion
Analysis
The trial court sentenced the defendant to a combined prison term of three years and eight months and ordered victim restitution based on the defendant's stipulations. The appellate court affirmed the judgment after conducting an independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende and finding no arguable issues for reversal.
| Ruling reviewed | Standard | The court | The model |
|---|---|---|---|
Sentencing and restitution orders“We have reviewed the record as required by Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal.” | unclear | not reached | agree with court The opinion does not explicitly state a standard of review for the sentencing or restitution orders, as it is a Wende appeal where the court conducts an independent review of the record for any arguable issues. The court found no error in the trial court's actions. |
Failure to revisit victim restitution orders“Whether the court erred by not revisiting the victim restitution orders to which Jackson had previously agreed.” | unclear | not reached | unsure Appellate counsel identified this as a potential issue, but the court's independent review concluded there were no arguable issues for reversal. The opinion does not provide specific legal reasoning for why this issue was meritless, only that the review was completed and no errors were found. |
Authorities
- relied: People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 — Requires appointed appellate counsel in a criminal case to file a brief identifying arguable issues or, if none exist, to request the court to conduct an independent review of the record.
- relied: Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 — Establishes the procedure for appointed counsel to withdraw from a criminal appeal when no arguable issues exist, requiring a brief identifying potential issues and an independent court review.
The appellate opinion: sound with gaps — The opinion is procedurally sound as it correctly follows the Wende/Anders protocol for handling appeals where appointed counsel finds no arguable issues. However, it is a 'sound with gaps' opinion because it provides no substantive legal analysis or reasoning for why the specific issue raised by counsel (restitution) was meritless, relying solely on the conclusion that the independent review found no error.
How this analysis was made · dispute it
unusual dispositionThe trial court sentenced Jackson, after guilty pleas in three cases, to an aggregate term of three years eight months and imposed victim restitution in stipulated amounts, reimposing those orders without objection when it recalled the sentence to add a consecutive eight-month term. On appeal, counsel filed a Wende brief identifying only a possible issue regarding the restitution orders, the Court of Appeal independently reviewed the record, found no arguable issues, and affirmed.
| Ruling reviewed | Standard | The court | The model |
|---|---|---|---|
Reimposition of stipulated victim restitution orders upon recall and resentencing without revisiting the amounts“Whether the court erred by not revisiting the victim restitution orders to which Jackson had previously agreed.” | unclear | correct | agree with court The restitution amounts were stipulated to by Jackson and reimposed without objection; a defendant who agrees to restitution amounts and fails to object at resentencing generally forfeits any challenge, and the opinion identifies no basis for error. The Wende review found no arguable issue, which is consistent with the record described. |
Aggregate sentence of three years eight months imposed after recall to add a consecutive eight-month term for a third conviction“The court added a consecutive eight-month term for a total sentence of three years eight months in prison.” | unclear | correct | agree with court The sentence tracked the plea agreements (two-year and one-year consecutive terms) plus a one-third-midterm-style eight-month consecutive term for the third case; nothing in the opinion suggests the sentence exceeded the agreed or lawful terms. The independent Wende review discovered no error. |
Authorities
- relied: People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 — When appointed appellate counsel finds no arguable issues, the Court of Appeal must independently review the entire record for arguable error.
- relied: Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 — Appointed counsel who finds an appeal frivolous should file a brief referring to anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal to assist the court's review.
The appellate opinion: sound with gaps — The opinion correctly follows the Wende/Anders procedure: counsel filed a no-issues brief identifying one possible issue, the defendant was given an opportunity to file a supplemental brief and did not, and the court independently reviewed the record and found no arguable issue. The result is defensible given the stipulated restitution and unobjected reimposition, though the opinion does not explain its reasoning on the identified restitution issue or cite forfeiture authority.
Opinion
Filed 8/21/24 P. v. Jackson 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, D083382, D083384
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. (Super. Ct. Nos. SCD298514, SCD298799) CORBIN BLAKE JACKSON, Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Dwayne K. Moring, Judge. Affirmed. Stephanie A. Lickel, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. This appeal arises from sentencing of appellant in three different cases, which sentences were combined resulting in a prison term of three years eight months in prison. Restitution in two of the cases was ordered in amounts stipulated to by appellant. In case No. SCD298514, Corbin Blake Jackson pleaded guilty to one count of evading an officer with reckless driving (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)) and one count of identity theft (Pen. Code, § 530.5, subd. (c)(1)) and agreed to serve a two-year prison term consecutive to other cases. In case No. SCD298799, Jackson pleaded guilty to one count of vehicle theft and agreed to a one-year consecutive term for that case. Jackson was sentenced to a term of three years in prison. The court ordered victim restitution in amounts agreed to by Jackson. Several months later, the court recalled the sentence to address a third conviction. The court added a consecutive eight-month term for a total sentence of three years eight months in prison. The court reimposed the restitution orders, without objection from Jackson. Jackson filed a notice of appeal. Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) indicating counsel has not been able to identify any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We notified Jackson he could file his own brief on appeal, but he has not responded. DISCUSSION As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks the court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende. To assist the court in its review, and in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel has identified a possible issue that was considered in evaluating the potential merits of this appeal: Whether the court erred by not revisiting the victim restitution orders to which Jackson had previously agreed.
2 We have reviewed the record as required by Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Jackson on this appeal. DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.
HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.
WE CONCUR:
IRION, J.
RUBIN, J.
Cites, in this corpus
- People v. Wende Crim. 20851 · 1979-10-12