People v. Hardin CA1/2

Filed 9/8/15 P. v. Hardin CA1/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A142014 v. MARIO ARMONDO HARDIN, (Sonoma County Super. Ct. No. SCR628073) Defendant and Appellant.

INTRODUCTION Defendant Mario Armondo Hardin appeals from the judgment in one of two separate matters that were part of a single negotiated disposition. Defendant’s court- appointed counsel has filed a brief seeking our independent review of the record, pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, to determine whether there are any arguable issues for review. Due to defendant’s entry of a no contest plea and the subsequent denial of a certificate of probable cause, pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b) and Penal Code section 1237.5,1 the issues we may consider on appeal are limited to sentencing issues that do not implicate the validity of the plea. Defendant has been informed of his right to file supplemental briefing, and he has not done so. After our independent review of the record, we find no errors or other issues requiring further briefing, and we affirm.

1 All further unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Case No. SCR628073 On December 21, 2012, in case number SCR628073 (the vehicle case), defendant was charged with violating (1) section 666.5, subdivision (a), by unlawfully taking and driving someone’s vehicle, a felony, having previously been convicted of violating Vehicle Code section 10851; (2) Vehicle Code section 10801, running a chop shop as defined in Vehicle Code section 250, a felony; (3) section 496d, subdivision (a), receiving a stolen vehicle, a felony; and (4) section 466, possessing tools to break and enter a vehicle, a misdemeanor. The complaint also alleged that defendant had served a prior prison term within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b). The charges in the vehicle case arose out of a probation search at defendant’s residence where officers found parts of a vehicle that had been reported stolen.2 On April 3, 2013, defendant entered into a change of plea agreement under section 1192.5 pursuant to which he pled no contest to count 1, the felony violation of section 666.5, subdivision (a); the remaining charges and prison prior allegation were dismissed. The agreement provided for a middle term of three years, half of which would be served in custody and half under mandatory supervision. In the change of plea form, defendant acknowledged and waived his constitutional rights to a trial, to confront and cross-examine witnesses, to present evidence, to subpoena witnesses, not to incriminate himself, and to have a trial by court or by jury. He acknowledged his right to be represented by an attorney at all stages of the proceedings and that he had adequately discussed the case with his attorney. He waived his right to a preliminary hearing. The agreement included a “Cruz waiver”3 providing, inter alia, that failure to appear for sentencing would void the agreement and defendant would not be allowed to withdraw his plea. The trial court confirmed that defendant had executed and understood the form, and accepted his plea. 2 The facts from case number SCR628073 are contained in a May 23, 2013, presentence report describing a probation search on December 17, 2012. 3 People v. Cruz (1988) 44 Cal.3d 1247, 1254, fn. 5 (Cruz).