People v. Jah CA1/3

Filed 2/29/16 P. v. Jah CA1/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A143101

v. (Alameda County DAVID S. JAH, Super. Ct. No. H54614) Jah and Appellant.

DAVID S. JAH, Petitioner, P. v. Jah CA1/3 v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ALAMEDA (Alameda County COUNTY, Super. Ct. No. H54614) Respondent.

On appeal from a judgment entered following his no contest plea, David Jah argues the court erred when it denied his motion to withdraw his plea, failed to conduct a Marsden1 hearing, accepted his plea without finding its factual basis, and declined to issue a certificate of probable cause. He raises essentially the same claims and asserts they were due to ineffective assistance of counsel in a petition for writ of mandate and/or habeas corpus which we ordered consolidated with his appeal. We deny the petition and dismiss the appeal.

1 People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118. 1

BACKGROUND Our statement of facts is based on the probation report. On the evening of July 3, 2013, officers observed Jah make a left turn without signaling. When the officers stopped Jah’s car they smelled a strong odor of burnt marijuana coming from its interior. Jah’s eyes were red, bloodshot and watery, his responses were slow and delayed, and he appeared disoriented. He admitted smoking marijuana earlier in the day and submitted to a series of field sobriety tests. Based on his performance of those tests and objective signs of being under the influence, he was placed under arrest. The officers found a loaded nine-millimeter handgun, 28.225 grams of marijuana and 14.022 grams of methamphetamine in Jah’s car and $1,911 in cash in his wallet. Jah was charged with possession of a controlled substance with a firearm, possession of a controlled substance for sale, possession of a firearm by a felon, carrying a concealed firearm in a vehicle, and possession of more than 28.5 grams of marijuana. The information also alleged a prior felony conviction for possession of cocaine base. On August 22, 2013, Jah, represented by attorney Daniel Duvernay, waived his right to a preliminary hearing and entered his no contest plea to possession of a controlled substance with a firearm. The remaining counts were dismissed pursuant to the terms of the plea bargain and the prior felony was stricken for purposes of sentencing. The People further agreed Jah would not be charged with any driving under the influence offenses related to the arrest and would be sentenced to five years’ probation subject to various conditions and forfeitures. Jah was properly advised of the terms and conditions of the plea bargain and admonished as to his rights and the consequences of his plea. The court accepted the plea. On September 16, 2013, Jah filed a pro per motion for discovery “including, but not limited to; all police reports, dispatch communications, lab report results, recorded phone calls, memorandum, notes, e-mails, flash messages, supplemental reports, incident reports, and all documents regarding DAVID JAH in the matter of Dublin PD-D13- 01974. As well as transcripts from plea agreement hearing,” which he asserted were “crucial to . . . Jah’s defense and possible civil claim in this matter.”