People v. Salem CA1/1

Filed 3/11/15 P. v. Salem CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A141920 v. AMENATEN SHILO SALEM, (San Mateo County Super. Ct. No. SC076840) Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Amenaten Shilo Salem appeals following a judgment entered pursuant to a no contest plea to three counts of robbery (Pen. Code, § 212.5) and an admission that each constituted a “strike” offense (id., §§ 667.5, 1192.7). After three additional counts for assault with a firearm were dismissed, the trial court sentenced him to a total of three years (one-third the midterm, consecutively), to be served consecutively to a prison term already being served.1 His appellate counsel has raised no issues and asks this court for an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any issues that would, if resolved favorably to defendant, result in reversal or modification of the judgment. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was notified of his right to file a supplemental brief, but has not done so. Upon independent review of the record, we conclude no arguable issues are presented for review, and affirm the judgment.

1 Defendant is serving an extended prison term from Santa Clara County. 1

DISCUSSION Penal Code section 1237.5 generally precludes an appeal from a judgment of conviction after a plea of no contest or guilty unless the defendant has applied for, and the trial court has granted, a certificate of probable cause. There are two exceptions: (1) a challenge to a search and seizure ruling, as to which an appeal is proper under Penal Code section 1538.5, subdivision (m); and (2) postplea sentencing issues. (People v. Shelton (2006) 37 Cal.4th 759, 766; see also People v. Buttram (2003) 30 Cal.4th 773, 780.) There is no certificate of probable cause. Accordingly, defendant cannot challenge the validity of his plea or any other matter that preceded its entry, except as permitted under the exceptions. (People v. Cole (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 850, 868.) Defendant made no motion to suppress. Therefore our review is of the postplea record. It shows defendant completed and signed a felony change of plea form setting forth the material terms of the agreed-to disposition. The court fully advised defendant in taking his no contest plea, sentenced defendant in accordance with the stipulated disposition, and imposed all required fines and fees. DISPOSITION After a review of the relevant record, we find no arguable issues and affirm the judgment.