People v. Jones CA2/4

Filed 12/16/14 P. v. Jones CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

THE PEOPLE, B253470 (Los Angeles County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. TA122782-01)

v.

ROBERT JONES,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Kelvin D. Filer, Judge. Affirmed. Mona D. Miller, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Respondent.

Appellant Robert Jones was convicted of attempted carjacking and robbery. His court-appointed counsel has filed an opening brief raising no issues. Following our independent examination of the entire record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), we conclude that no arguable issues exist, and affirm.

RELEVANT PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On April 10, 2012, appellant was arrested for the attempted carjacking (Pen. Code, §§ 215, 664) and robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) of Annie-Claude Sanchis.1 On June 5, 2012, prior to preliminary hearing, the trial court denied appellant’s Marsden motion for a new court-appointed attorney.2 On July 5, 2012, following the preliminary hearing, an information was filed charging appellant with attempted carjacking (count 1) and robbery (count 2). Accompanying the charges were allegations that appellant had suffered one prior felony conviction constituting a serious felony (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)) and a strike under the “Three Strikes” law (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)), for which he had served a prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (a)). Appellant pleaded not guilty and denied the special allegations. In August 2012, after appellant’s representation had been reassigned to another court-appointed attorney, the trial court denied appellant’s Marsden motion regarding that attorney. In September 2012, during appellant’s first jury trial, appellant was determined to be not competent to stand trial, and a mistrial was declared.