People v. Trujillo CA4/1
- Proceeding
- appeal from a judgment
- Trial court
- Superior Court of San Diego County · No. SCD235443
- Trial judge
- Timothy R. Walsh
- Outcome
- affirmed — Affirmed.
- Area
- criminal
- Panel
- McINTYRE (author), Richard D. Huffman, Sr., Judith D. McConnell
Analysis
The trial court sentenced the defendant to a five-year prison term following his guilty pleas to multiple counts including conspiracy to commit grand theft and forgery. The Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment after conducting an independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, finding no reasonably arguable issues on appeal.
| Ruling reviewed | Standard | The court | The model |
|---|---|---|---|
Affirmance of the judgment of conviction and sentence“Our review of the record pursuant to Wende has disclosed no reasonably arguable issues on appeal.” | de novo | not reached | agree with court The appellate court applied the standard of review for a Wende appeal, which requires an independent examination of the record to determine if there are any reasonably arguable issues. The court concluded that no such issues existed, thereby affirming the lower court's judgment. This is the standard procedural outcome for a Wende appeal where no errors are identified in the record. |
Authorities
- relied: People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 — Requires appointed appellate counsel to conduct an independent review of the record to identify any reasonably arguable issues when no argument is presented.
The appellate opinion: sound — The opinion is procedurally sound as it correctly identifies the applicable standard for a Wende appeal and states the result of the independent review. It follows the mandatory procedure for handling appeals where appointed counsel presents no argument.
How this analysis was made · dispute it
unusual dispositionThe trial court accepted Trujillo's guilty plea to conspiracy to commit grand theft, identity theft, forgery, and filing false instruments, with an admitted over-$500,000 loss enhancement, and sentenced him to the agreed five-year prison term with fines, fees, and $653,421.45 in joint restitution. On appeal, appointed counsel filed a Wende brief raising no issues, Trujillo filed no supplemental brief, and the Court of Appeal independently reviewed the record, found no arguable issues, and affirmed.
| Ruling reviewed | Standard | The court | The model |
|---|---|---|---|
Judgment of conviction and five-year sentence entered on guilty plea, including upper term on count 1, enhancement, concurrent midterms, fines, fees, and joint restitution of $653,421.45“Our review of the record pursuant to Wende has disclosed no reasonably arguable issues on appeal.” | unclear | correct | agree with court The court conducted an independent Wende review of the record and found no arguable issues. The sentence matched the negotiated five-year term, a certificate of probable cause was obtained, and nothing in the opinion suggests any defect in the plea, sentence, or restitution order. Because the opinion recites no record detail beyond the plea and sentence, there is no basis to identify a specific legal error, but the procedure followed is the one Wende and Kelly require. |
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 before affirming.
The appellate opinion: sound — The opinion follows the standard Wende procedure: counsel filed a no-issue brief, the defendant was given the opportunity to file a supplemental brief and did not, and the court independently reviewed the record and found no arguable issues. The result is defensible on the record described, though the opinion does not cite People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, which directs the court to describe the contentions raised and the reasons for its conclusion in Wende opinions; the brief recitation here is minimal but adequate given no issues were raised.
Opinion
Filed 5/7/15 P. v. Trujillo 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, D066180
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. (Super. Ct. No. SCD235443)
JESSE OMAR TRUJILLO,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Timothy R. Walsh, Judge. Affirmed.
Patrick J. Hennessey, Jr., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
In October 2012, the San Diego County grand jury indicted Jesse Omar Trujillo and two codefendants of numerous charges related to a scheme where the men used stolen identities to purchase two homes. Trujillo pleaded guilty to one count each of conspiracy to commit grand theft (count 1), using personal identifying information of another (count 2) and forgery of documents (count 4). He also pleaded guilty to two counts of filing a false instrument (counts 8, 17) and admitted an allegation that the loss to the victims was more than $500,000. It was agreed Trujillo would receive a five-year prison term.
The trial court later sentenced Trujillo to the upper term of three years in prison on count 1, a two-year term for the enhancement, and concurrent midterms of two years on the remaining charges. Trujillo received credit for four days of presentence custody. The court imposed a number of fines and fees and ordered joint restitution to the victim in the amount of $653,421.45. Trujillo timely appealed. The court later granted Trujillo's request for issuance of a certificate of probable cause.
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief summarizing the facts and proceedings below. He presented no argument for reversal, but asked this court to review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). We granted Trujillo permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not responded.
Our review of the record pursuant to Wende has disclosed no reasonably arguable issues on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Trujillo on this appeal.
2 DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
MCINTYRE, J.
WE CONCUR:
MCCONNELL, P. J.
HUFFMAN, J.
Cites, in this corpus
- People v. Wende Crim. 20851 · 1979-10-12