People v. Patterson CA5

California Court of Appeal Jun 10, 2015 No. F068461Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court dismissed the appeal because the defendant failed to obtain a certificate of probable cause as required by Penal Code section 1237.5 for appeals following a no-contest plea.

Issues

Whether an appeal from a judgment entered after a no-contest plea is reviewable without a certificate of probable cause.
Whether the defendant's appeal falls under any exceptions to the certificate of probable cause requirement.

Disposition. dismissed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Patterson’s notice of appeal did not seek a certificate of probable cause. Nor did it identify any issues on appeal for which a certificate was not required. Accordingly, we will dismiss the appeal.”

“Generally, section 1237.5 precludes an appeal from the judgment entered after a guilty plea unless the defendant applies for, and the trial court grants the defendant, a certificate of probable cause.”

Filed 6/10/15 P. v. Patterson CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

THE PEOPLE, F068461 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. 1438598 & v. 1449498)

GEORGE CONWAY PATTERSON, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County. Linda A. McFadden, Judge. Patrick J. Hennessey, Jr., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Cornell, Acting P.J., Franson, J. and Peña, J.

George Conway Patterson pled no contest to three crimes in two separate cases. Pursuant to the agreement of the parties, he was sentenced to a total of three years eight months (with the sentence in the other case to run concurrently). Appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. By letter dated April 29, 2014, we invited Patterson to submit additional briefing. To date he has not done so. Patterson’s notice of appeal did not seek a certificate of probable cause. Nor did it identify any issues on appeal for which a certificate was not required. Accordingly, we will dismiss the appeal. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY This case involves two separate cases against Patterson. In the first case (case No. 1438598), Patterson was charged with carrying a concealed dirk or dagger (hereafter the concealed weapon case). (Pen. Code, former § 12020, subd. (a)(4),1 now see § 21310.) In addition, the information alleged three prior prison sentences within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b). Patterson pled no contest to the charge and admitted one prior prison term for an agreed-upon sentence of three years (midterm of two years plus a one-year enhancement). The trial court granted the prosecution’s motion to dismiss the remaining two prison priors. The three-year sentence was comprised of 18 months in county jail and 18 months on supervised release. Six months later Patterson was charged in case No. 1449498 with evading a police officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)) and auto theft (id., § 10851, subd. (a)) (hereafter the auto theft case). The complaint also alleged the same three prior convictions that resulted in a prison sentence pursuant to section 667.5, subdivision (b). These charges apparently also resulted in the filing of a petition for violation of supervised release in the concealed weapon case.

People v. Patterson CA5

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief