People v. Hudson CA4/1
- Proceeding
- appeal from a judgment
- Trial court
- Superior Court of San Diego County · No. SCN320087
- Trial judge
- David L. Berry
- Outcome
- affirmed — Affirmed.
- Area
- criminal
- Panel
- Patricia D. Benke (author), O'Rourke, Gilbert Nares
Analysis
The trial court accepted a guilty plea and sentenced the defendant to a stipulated term of three years and eight months in state prison. The Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment, finding no reasonably arguable issues on appeal after a Wende review.
| Ruling reviewed | Standard | The court | The model |
|---|---|---|---|
Sentencing in accordance with the plea agreement“Hudson voluntarily stipulated to a sentence of three years eight months as part of his plea agreement with the People. Hudson was sentenced to three years eight months.” | unclear | not reached | agree with court The court found no reasonably arguable appellate contention regarding the sentencing because the sentence imposed matched the stipulated term in the plea agreement. |
Authorities
- relied: People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 — Requires appointed counsel to review the entire record for reasonably arguable issues when filing a Wende brief.
- relied: Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 — Establishes the procedure for appointed counsel to file a brief identifying potential but not arguable issues.
- relied: People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754 — Prohibits courts from considering dismissed charges in sentencing unless the defendant agrees to a waiver.
The appellate opinion: sound — The opinion is procedurally sound as it correctly applies the Wende/Anders framework to a stipulated sentence that was fully honored by the trial court. The reasoning is sufficient because the record explicitly confirms the sentence matched the plea agreement, leaving no basis for reversal.
How this analysis was made · dispute it
unusual dispositionThe trial court accepted Hudson's guilty plea to robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) and withholding a stolen vehicle (Pen. Code, § 496d) and imposed the stipulated sentence of three years eight months in state prison. On appeal, appointed counsel filed a Wende brief, Hudson filed no supplemental brief, and the Court of Appeal independently reviewed the record, found no arguable issue, and affirmed.
| Ruling reviewed | Standard | The court | The model |
|---|---|---|---|
Imposition of the stipulated sentence of three years eight months (middle term for robbery plus one-third the middle term for section 496d, consecutive) in accordance with the plea agreement.“Hudson voluntarily stipulated to a sentence of three years eight months as part of his plea agreement with the People. Hudson was sentenced to three years eight months.” | unclear | correct | agree with court The sentence imposed matched the stipulated term exactly, and the components (three-year middle term for section 211 and eight months as one-third of the two-year middle term for section 496d, consecutive) are lawful under Penal Code section 1170.1. A defendant who receives the sentence he bargained for has no cognizable complaint that the sentence departed from the plea agreement. The court's conclusion that this is not an arguable issue is supported by the record described. |
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 to determine whether any reasonably arguable issue exists.
- relied: Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 — Appointed counsel who finds no meritorious issues may file a brief referring to anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal, allowing the court to conduct its own review.
- relied: People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754 — A sentencing court may not consider facts underlying charges dismissed as part of a plea bargain unless the defendant waives that protection (a Harvey waiver).
The appellate opinion: sound — The opinion correctly applies the Wende/Anders procedure, notes that the defendant was given an opportunity to file his own brief, and resolves the only referred issue by confirming that the sentence imposed equals the stipulated term. The opinion is brief and does not discuss whether a certificate of probable cause was obtained, but that omission does not affect the result because no challenge to the plea's validity was raised and the sentence conformed to the bargain.
Opinion
Filed 8/22/14 P. v. Hudson 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 APEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE, D064832
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. (Super. Ct. No. SCN320087)
LAMAR TYREEK HUDSON,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, David L.
Berry, Judge. Affirmed.
Michelle Rogers, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
As part of a plea agreement, defendant and appellant Lamar Tyreek Hudson pled guilty to one count of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) and one count of withholding a stolen vehicle (§ 496d). The trial court sentenced Hudson to a stipulated sentence of three years eight months in state prison. Hudson timely appealed from the judgment. Appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, setting forth the facts of the case and requesting that we review the entire record. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel refers to as a possible, but not arguable, issue: whether Hudson was sentenced in accordance with his guilty plea agreement. Hudson was granted 30 days to file a brief on his own behalf and has not done so.
BACKGROUND
Hudson was charged with one count of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211), one count of unlawfully taking and driving a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), and one count of withholding a stolen vehicle (Pen. Code, § 496d), each with an allegation that Hudson was on bail at the time of the offense (Pen. Code, § 12022.1, subd. (b)).
Hudson pled guilty to robbery and withholding a stolen vehicle. In exchange for his change of plea, the People agreed to stipulate to a sentence of three years eight months in prison, to dismiss the remaining charge, and to dismiss an unrelated charge, with a Harvey waiver.1 At a subsequent sentencing hearing, Hudson was sentenced to a term of three years eight months in prison.2 1 People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754 prohibits courts, in sentencing a defendant, from considering other charges that have been dismissed as part of a plea bargain, unless the defendant agrees that the court can consider such dismissed charges.
2 The middle term for Penal Code section 211 (three years) and one-third of the middle term for Penal Code section 496d (eight months, which is one-third of two years), to be served consecutively. 2 DISCUSSION Hudson voluntarily stipulated to a sentence of three years eight months as part of his plea agreement with the People. Hudson was sentenced to three years eight months.
Accordingly, we find no reasonably arguable appellate contention with respect to the issue referred to by counsel. Moreover, a review of the entire record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 has disclosed no other reasonably arguable appellate issue.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
BENKE, Acting P. J.
WE CONCUR:
NARES, J.
O'ROURKE, J.
Cites, in this corpus
- People v. Harvey Crim 21022 · 1979-11-27
- People v. Wende Crim. 20851 · 1979-10-12