People v. Stubbs

Opinion

WUNDERLICH. J.—

Statement of the Case

Defendant appeals from a judgment after he pleaded guilty to possession of methamphetamine for sale, receiving stolen property, and tampering with a vehicle identification number and admitted various firearm enhancement allegations and a prior-prison-term enhancement allegation. He contends he received ineffective assistance of counsel in that

prior

to the plea, defense counsel failed to advise him that he could challenge a search by police and seek the disclosure of a confidential informant. He also contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to withdraw the plea based on counsel’s ineffective assistance.

1

Discussion

We do not reach these claims. In effect, they challenge the propriety of defendant’s guilty plea. As such, defendant was required to obtain a

[245]

certificate of probable cause from the trial court in order to raise the issue on appeal. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 31(d); see

People

v.

Panizzon

(1996) 13 Cal.4th 68, 75 [51 Cal.Rptr.2d 851, 913 P.2d 1061]; cf.

People

v.

Ribero

(1971) 4 Cal.3d 55, 63 [92 Cal.Rptr. 692, 480 P.2d 308];

People

v.

Manriquez

(1993) 18 Cal.App.4th 1167, 1170 [22 Cal.Rptr.2d 779];

People

v.

Cotton