People v. Smith CA4/3

Filed 2/10/15 P. v. Smith CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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). The opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G050011

v. (Super. Ct. No. 13WF1141)

KEITH ALONZO SMITH, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Walter P. Schwarm and Debra C. Carrillo, Judges. Affirmed. Janice R. Mazur, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *

Keith Alonzo Smith pleaded guilty to 18 offenses committed on five occasions, including second degree robbery, second degree burglary, false imprisonment, and resisting arrest. He admitted using a knife, and having suffered a serious felony prior conviction. In February 2014, the trial court imposed a 13-year prison term. Smith’s appointed counsel filed a brief under the procedures outlined in People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Counsel summarized the facts of the case, the procedural history, and possible legal issues with citations to the record and appropriate authority, but raised no specific issues, and asked this court to review the record to determine whether there were any arguable issues. Counsel did not argue against her client or assert the appeal was frivolous. Counsel submitted a declaration stating she thoroughly reviewed the record, as did a different attorney under the Appellate Defenders independent case program. Counsel advised Smith she would be filing a Wende brief and provided him a copy, and she advised him he could personally file a supplemental brief on his own behalf raising any issues he believed worthy of consideration. She stated she was making the appellate record available to him, and advised Smith he could request to have her relieved as counsel. We gave Smith 30 days to file a supplemental brief, and later granted him a 45-day extension, but he did not avail himself of the opportunity. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In April 2013, the Orange County District Attorney filed a criminal complaint alleging Smith committed the following crimes: second degree robbery (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 212.5, subd. (c), count 1; all statutory citations are to the Penal Code), false imprisonment (§§ 236, 237, subd. (a), count 2), second degree burglary (§§ 459, 460, subd. (b), count 3), and resisting arrest (§ 148, subd. (a)(1), count 4), occurring April 15, 2013; second degree robbery (§§ 211, 212.4, subd. (c), counts 5 & 6) and second degree burglary (§§ 459, 460, subd. (b), count 7), occurring September 11, 2012; second degree robbery (§§ 459, 460, subd. (b), counts 8-10), second degree burglary (§ 459, 460,