People v. Stites CA5

Filed 12/10/14 P. v. Stites 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F067803 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. MF010383A) v.

DONALD EDWARD STITES, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Bryan K. Stainfield and John D. Oglesby, Judges.† Michael Allen,, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo- * Before Cornell, Acting P.J., Kane, J. and Franson, J. † Judge Stainfield presided over appellant’s change of plea hearing. Judge Oglesby presided over appellant’s motion to substitute counsel and sentenced appellant.

PROCEDURAL SUMMARY Appellant Donald Edward Stites was charged in an information filed April 15, 2013, with being a felon unlawfully in possession of ammunition (Pen. Code § 30305, subd. (a)(1), count 1),1 being a felon in possession of a firearm (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1), count 2), felony evasion of a peace officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, count 3), felony evasion of a peace officer while driving in the opposite direction of traffic (Veh. Code, § 2800.4, count 4), assault with a deadly weapon, a car (§ 245, subd. (a)(1), count 5), and misdemeanor delay of a peace officer (§ 148, subd. (a)(1), count 6). The complaint alleged in count 5 that appellant was armed with a firearm (§ 12022, subd. (a)(1)) and had four prior prison term enhancements (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). On May 9, 2013, appellant entered into a plea agreement.2 In exchange for admission of felony evasion of a peace officer, count 3, appellant would receive a stipulated sentence of three years and the remaining allegations would be dismissed. Appellant initialed and executed a felony advisement of rights, waiver and plea form in which he acknowledged the consequences of his plea and his constitutional rights pursuant to Boykin/Tahl.3 The trial court verified from appellant that he initialed and executed the change of plea form and advised appellant of the consequences of his plea. The parties stipulated to a factual basis for the plea based on the preliminary hearing transcript. Appellant pled no contest to felony evasion of a peace officer.