People v. Phipps CA1/4

Filed 11/26/14 P. v. Phipps CA1/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A141179 v. STEPHEN WILLIAM PHIPPS, (Lake County Super. Ct. No. CR921777) Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Stephen William Phipps appeals from his conviction and resulting sentence. The conviction followed defendant’s no contest plea to one count of felonious driving while under the influence of a drug with injury (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (a)), and his admission to personally inflicting great bodily injury upon two individuals within the meaning of Penal Code section 12022.7, subdivision (a). Defendant also admitted a September 2000 prior conviction for driving under the influence. (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (b).) Defendant’s counsel has filed an opening brief in which no issues are raised, and asks this court for an independent review of the record as required by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Counsel has declared that defendant has been notified that no issues were being raised by counsel on appeal, and that an independent review under Wende instead was being requested. Defendant was also advised of his right personally to file a supplemental brief raising any issues he chooses to bring to this court’s attention. Defendant filed a supplemental brief alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, and various “errors” in the handling of his case.

1

We note that defendant has not obtained a certificate of probable cause, which is required by Penal Code section 1237.5 when a defendant seeks to appeal from a judgment entered following a guilty or no contest plea. A certificate is not required when the notice of appeal states, as defendant’s does here, that the appeal is based upon the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea that do not affect the validity of the plea. Accordingly, we have reviewed the whole record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, focusing upon grounds for appeal arising after entry of the plea. Having done so, we conclude that there is no arguable issue on appeal. Procedural and Material Factual Background of Case Defendant was charged in a first amended information dated March 29, 2012, with one count each of felonious driving while under the influence of a drug with injury (Veh.