The People v. Chavez CA2/7

Filed 9/23/13 P. v. Chavez CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SEVEN

THE PEOPLE, B247623

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA399303) v.

JOSE ANDREA CHAVEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, William N. Sterling, Judge. Affirmed. Richard L. Fitzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_____________________

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Defendant Jose Andrea Chavez, armed with a baseball bat, entered three fast food restaurants, threatened on-duty employees, and attempted to break open numerous cash registers. Los Angeles Police Department officers arrested Chavez, who was charged by information with one count of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211)1 and two counts of attempted second degree robbery (§§ 211, 664) with special allegations he had used a deadly and dangerous weapon to commit the attempted robberies (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1); counts 2 & 3). Represented by counsel, Chavez pleaded not guilty to the charges and denied the special allegations. At a pretrial conference on August 29, 2012 the trial court declared a doubt about Chavez’s mental competence under section 1368. The court suspended criminal proceedings and ordered an examination of Chavez by a court-appointed mental health expert. At a hearing on October 19, 2012 the court reviewed a psychiatric evaluation prepared by the court-appointed expert, found Chavez competent to stand trial under section 1368, and resumed criminal proceedings. The court also heard and denied Chavez’s requests to have new counsel appointed for him under People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118. On January 30, 2013 Chavez agreed to enter into a negotiated plea of no contest to second degree robbery in count 1 in exchange for a sentence of five years. Chavez then changed his mind and wanted to plead no contest to both count 1 and attempted second degree robbery in count 2 as strikes, in exchange for a state prison sentence of two years, with the remaining count and special allegations dismissed. By doing so, Chavez essentially agreed, against the advice of his attorney, to “take the two strikes for two years” rather than five years in state prison.