People v. Rodriguez CA1/5

Filed 12/12/14 P. v. Rodriguez CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, A142407 v. BRUCE SCOTT RODRIGUEZ, (Del Norte County Super. Ct. Nos. CRF 13-9841, Defendant and Appellant. PRCS 13-0027)

Appellant Bruce Scott Rodriguez, pursuant to a negotiated disposition, entered a plea of guilty to driving under the influence with prior felony convictions (Veh. Code, §§ 23550.5, 23152, subd. (a)).1 The trial court denied probation and imposed a term of confinement of two years, the maximum permitted under the terms of the plea agreement. Rodriguez appeals his sentence. Assigned counsel has submitted a Wende2 brief, certifying that counsel has been unable to identify any issues for appellate review. Counsel also has submitted a declaration confirming that Rodroguez has been advised of his right to personally file a supplemental brief raising any points which he wishes to call to the court’s attention. No supplemental brief has been submitted. As required, we have independently reviewed the record. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 109–110.) We find no arguable issues and therefore affirm.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Vehicle Code. 2 People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.

1

BACKGROUND Rodriguez did not obtain a certificate of probable cause (Pen. Code, § 1237.5; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b)), and there are no cognizable issues before us relating to his guilt or to his plea. (People v. Mendez (1999) 19 Cal.4th 1084, 1097, 1099; People v. Panizzon (1996) 13 Cal.4th 68, 74.) We briefly recite the underlying facts only as they may be relevant to the court’s sentencing choices. On November 9, 2013, responding to a citizen report of a suspected drunk driver, Crescent City police officers observed Rodriguez’s truck in the parking lot of a gas station. A passenger in Rodriguez’s vehicle indicated that Rodriguez was the driver and had gone inside the gas station minimart. Rodriguez admitted that he had been driving, and that he had been drinking. A breath test administered to Rodriguez resulted in readings of .106 and .108 percent blood alcohol content. At the time of his arrest, Rodriguez was on postrelease community supervision (PRCS) for a 2010 conviction for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (case No. PRCS 13-0027). Rodriguez was charged by information (case No. CRF 13-9841) with driving under the influence with prior felony driving under the influence convictions (§§ 23550.5, 23152, subd. (a)), driving with a .08 percent or more blood-alcohol level with prior felony driving under the influence convictions (§§ 23550.5, 23152, subd. (b)), and misdemeanor driving with a suspended license (§ 14601.2, subd. (a)). Three prior prison term enhancements (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)) were also alleged. A petition to revoke PRCS was filed based on the new offenses. Following an earlier mistrial, Rodriguez entered a plea of guilty on March 21, 2014, to driving under the influence with prior felony convictions (§§ 23550.5, 23152, subd. (a)).3 The plea agreement provided for a two-year “lid” on any prison sentence to be imposed, with Rodriguez reserving the right to argue for probation at the time of