People v. Russell CA3

Filed 12/12/14 P. v. Russell CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C076441

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 12F07088)

v.

WILLIE RUSSELL,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Willie Russell has asked that we review the record to determine whether there exist any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) Defendant has filed a supplemental brief. Finding no merit in defendant’s arguments, and no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to him, we affirm the judgment but direct correction of the abstract.

1

BACKGROUND On or about July 3, 2012, defendant willfully inflicted corporal injury on Patricia Doe, his former cohabitant. The People charged defendant with domestic violence, resulting in a traumatic condition (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a))1 and knowingly violating a criminal protective order (§ 166, subd. (c)(1)). The People also alleged that defendant was previously convicted of domestic violence (§ 273.5) and assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245). Defendant pleaded no contest to the domestic violence charge and admitted his prior conviction for assault with a deadly weapon, a strike offense. The remaining charges and allegations were dismissed in the interest of justice along with an unrelated matter. Defendant waived a referral to probation and, consistent with the plea agreement, the trial court sentenced him to four years in state prison. The court ordered defendant to pay various fines and fees and awarded him a total of 290 days of custody credit. Defendant appeals without a certificate of probable cause. DISCUSSION We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests that we review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. He has filed a supplemental brief raising three issues. Defendant first contends he was “under serious medication” that “fogged [his] mind and dulled [his] senses” at the time he entered into his plea agreement. Because this contention challenges the validity of defendant’s plea and he failed to secure a