People v. Franklin CA1/5

Filed 6/18/14 P. v. Franklin CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A139115 v. VINCENT R. FRANKLIN II, (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. C170498) Defendant and Appellant.

Vincent R. Franklin II appeals from a judgment of conviction entered after he pleaded no contest to a single count of pandering by procuring. On appeal, he contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to withdraw his no contest plea. He also contends the lower court improperly imposed certain fines. We conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to withdraw the plea, and we will therefore affirm the judgment. We will remand the matter to the trial court for the limited purpose of modifying the abstract of judgment to strike one of the fines. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On May 11, 2012, a criminal complaint filed in Alameda County Superior Court charged Franklin with human trafficking of a minor (Pen. Code § 236.1; Count 1),1 pimping a minor (§ 266h, subd. (b); Count 2), and pandering by procuring (§ 266i,

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

subd. (a)(1); Count 3). On December 19, 2012, Franklin pleaded no contest to one count of violating section 266i, subdivision (a)(1). On April 15, 2013, appellant moved to withdraw his plea. The trial court denied the motion on May 3, 2013. Franklin was sentenced on June 21, 2013, to four years in state prison. He was also required to register as a sex offender pursuant to section 290. Franklin was granted a certificate of probable cause on June 20, 2013, and he filed a timely notice of appeal on June 27, 2013. Because the issues on appeal concern only Franklin’s motion to withdraw his plea and certain fines imposed at sentencing, we need not detail the facts of the underlying offense. For purposes of the matters presented for our decision, a brief description of the plea proceedings will suffice. On December 19, 2012, Franklin, his counsel, and the prosecutor appeared in court. The court asked the prosecutor to state the terms of the parties’ proposed plea agreement, and the prosecutor explained Franklin would be pleading guilty or no contest to pandering of a minor over the age of 16. The prosecutor stated Franklin would be sentenced to four years in prison, and he expressly noted, “[Franklin] will be required to register as a sexual offender under Penal Code Section 290 for the remainder of his life.” (Italics added.) In response to the trial court’s question, Franklin responded that (1) he understood and agreed to the terms of the plea agreement; (2) he did not need any more time to talk to his attorney; and (3) he was not taking any medications, drugs, or alcohol. The trial court then specifically asked, “And you understand that you’re going to be subject to a lifetime registration under Penal Code section 290?” (Italics added.) Franklin responded, “Yes.” Franklin said he understood his waiver form and had had sufficient time to read it. When the court asked him whether he had had sufficient time to speak to his counsel about his waiver of constitutional rights, Franklin answered affirmatively, but an audience member said no. Franklin then asked for more time to talk to his attorney, and the trial court passed the matter. When the parties returned that afternoon after the break, Franklin said he had consulted his counsel about the rights he was giving up and did not need to speak with his attorney again. The court explained to Franklin that he would be