People v. Boyer CA2/4

Filed 3/25/14 P. v. Boyer CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR

THE PEOPLE, B245556

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. PA070872) v.

ANDRE PIERRE BOYER,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court for Los Angeles County, Cynthia L. Ulfig, Judge. Appeal dismissed. John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews and Linda C. Johnson, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Defendant Andre Pierre Boyer filed a notice of appeal from a judgment entered following a plea agreement. The notice of appeal indicated that the appeal is based upon both the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea that do not affect the validity of the plea, as well as matters for which a certificate of probable cause is required. Concurrently with the notice of appeal, defendant filed with the trial court a request for certificate of probable cause. The trial court denied his request. In his appellant’s opening brief, defendant contends the trial court obtained an inadequate Faretta1 waiver because he was not advised of the potential penalties for the crimes with which he was charged; defendant also challenges the validity of the Supreme Court’s decision in Faretta. The Attorney General addresses the merits of these issues in the respondent’s brief, but also argues that we should decline to address the issues defendant raises because he failed to obtain a certificate of probable cause. The Attorney General is correct. Penal Code section 1237.52 states that “[n]o appeal shall be taken by the defendant from a judgment of conviction upon a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, . . . except where both of the following are met: [¶] (a) The defendant has filed with the trial court a written statement, executed under oath or penalty of perjury showing reasonable constitutional, jurisdictional, or other grounds going to the legality of the proceedings [and] [¶] (b) The trial court has executed and filed a certificate of probable cause for such appeal with the clerk of the court.” The California Supreme Court has recognized only two exceptions to the certificate of probable cause requirement: “First, a defendant may appeal from a ruling involving a search and seizure issue without obtaining a certificate, because an