gno.law

People v. Aguirre CA6

California Court of Appeal · H040145 · 2014-06-30 · Unpublished

Area
criminal
Panel
Nathan D. Mihara (author)

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion

Filed 6/30/14 P. v. Aguirre CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, H040145 (Monterey County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. SS131535)

v.

JOSE CARMEN ALAVARADO AGUIRRE,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Jose Carmen Alavarado Aguirre’s suppression motion was denied, and he pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350) on the condition that he be granted deferred entry of judgment. The court accepted his plea and granted him deferred entry of judgment. Defendant then filed a notice of appeal from the denial of his suppression motion. His appointed counsel filed an opening brief that purported to be authorized under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, but he admitted that deferred entry of judgment “is not appealable.” Since there was no appealable order or judgment, we are compelled to dismiss the appeal. In People v. Mazurette (2001) 24 Cal.4th 789 (Mazurette), the defendant’s suppression motion was denied, he pleaded no contest, and the court granted deferred entry of judgment. The defendant then appealed, and his appellate counsel filed a Wende brief. (Mazurette, at pp. 791-792.) The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, and the California Supreme Court upheld that decision on the ground that there was no appealable order or judgment. (Mazurette, at pp. 793-796.) The purported appeal is dismissed.

_______________________________ Mihara, J.

WE CONCUR:

_____________________________ Premo, Acting P. J.

_____________________________ Elia, J.

Cites, in this corpus