People v. Jean CA1/4

Filed 2/21/25 P. v. Jean CA1/4

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A169974 v. (Napa County ANDY JEAN, Super. Ct. No. 23CR002102) Defendant and Appellant.

Andy Jean appeals from a judgment rendered upon a negotiated disposition of his case in Napa County Superior Court. Jean’s appointed appellate counsel has submitted a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) requesting we independently review the record. Counsel has advised Jean of his right to submit a supplemental brief, and Jean has not done so. Our independent review of the record has disclosed no appellate issues that warrant further briefing. Indeed, we conclude this appeal is moot in light of the trial court’s issuance of an amended judgment while this appeal was pending and, therefore, we will dismiss this appeal. I. BACKGROUND The Napa County District Attorney first charged Jean with an assortment of crimes in a complaint filed in September 2023. Additional charges were added, resulting in the filing of an amended complaint and a

1

second amended complaint. In the second amended complaint, filed in December 2023, Jean was charged with two counts of first degree burglary of a person who was present (Pen. Code, § 459)1 and one count each of the following: attempted robbery (§§ 211, 213, subd. (b)); petty theft (§ 490.2); giving false information to a police officer (§ 148.9, subd. (a)); receiving stolen property not exceeding $950 (§ 496, subd. (a)); second degree commercial burglary (§ 459); and attempted grand theft of a person (§§ 664, 487, subd (c)). At the same time as the filing of this second amended complaint, Jean and the prosecution agreed to a negotiated disposition of his case in which he pleaded no contest to first degree burglary of a person who was present, a violent strike offense; second degree commercial burglary; and attempted grand theft of a person. The parties asked the court to sentence Jean to serve three years in state prison and dismiss the other counts with a Harvey2 waiver. Jean signed a plea form agreeing to this negotiated disposition, as did the prosecutor. Jean’s attorney acknowledged on the form that he had advised Jean regarding the charges, possible defenses, and the consequences of Jean’s pleas. The court found that Jean expressly, knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his rights, and that he understood the nature of the charges and the consequences of his pleas. The court held a hearing, found Jean had made his pleas freely and voluntarily and that there was a factual basis for them, accepted the pleas, found Jean guilty of the counts pled to, and dismissed the other charges with a Harvey waiver.