People v. Crum CA5

Filed 10/29/13 P. v. Crum CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

THE PEOPLE, F065230 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. MCR039294) v.

SHERI CRUM, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Madera County. Ernest J. LiCalsi, Judge. Eric Cioffi, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Julie A. Hokans and Robert J. Jibson, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Cornell, Acting P.J., Franson, J., and Peña, J.

Appellant, Sheri Crum, challenges the trial court‟s denial of her motion to withdraw her no contest plea. According to Crum, she was “on a host of medications” at the time of the plea, which adversely affected her ability to voluntarily and intelligently waive her trial rights. Crum alleges she demonstrated, by clear and convincing evidence, that there was good cause for permitting her to withdraw her plea. We disagree and affirm. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE1 On February 9, 2010, while an inmate at Central California Women‟s Facility (CCWF), Crum and another inmate were seen putting their hands in the front of their pants. When ordered to show an officer what she had in her pocket, Crum withdrew a small container which had one Oxycodone and two Gabapentin pills inside. Oxycodone is a controlled substance. On May 6, 2011, the day scheduled for her preliminary hearing, Crum pled no contest to unauthorized possession of Oxycodone in CCWF (Pen. Code, § 4573.6)2 and she admitted three of six alleged prison priors (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). The plea was conditional, i.e., the case would be dismissed if Crum obeyed all laws and stayed off prison property for one year. If not, Crum faced a potential seven-year sentence. Crum initialed and signed a plea form and indicated she had no questions about the form. After questioning Crum, the trial court found there was a factual basis for the plea and that Crum had made a knowing, intelligent and voluntary waiver of rights and admission of the charges. Soon after, Crum was arrested on an unrelated matter and, on May 31, 2011, convicted pursuant to a plea bargain of identity theft (§ 530.5, subd. (a)), committed May