People v. Hernandez CA2/7

Filed 6/20/16 P. v. Hernandez CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SEVEN

THE PEOPLE, B265854

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KA108331) v.

SILVIO HERNANDEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Salvatore Sirna, Judge. Affirmed. Murray A. Rosenberg, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

____________________________

In May 2015, Silvio Hernandez was charged in an information with one count of felony escape without force or violence from the Julius Klein Conservation Camp (fire camp) (Pen. Code, § 4532, subd. (b)(1)) with special allegations he had suffered one prior serious or violent felony conviction within the meaning of the three strikes law (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(j), 1170.12, subds.(a)-(d)) and had previously served four separate prison terms for felonies (Pen. Code, § 667.5, sub. (b)). At his arraignment, Hernandez entered a negotiated plea of no contest to felony escape without force or violence from a fire camp with the agreed sentence to be the lower term of term of 16 months to be served consecutively to the sentence he was serving when he escaped.1 At the time he entered his plea, Hernandez was advised of his constitutional rights and the nature and consequences of the plea, which he stated he understood. Defense counsel joined in the waivers of Hernandez’s constitutional rights. The trial court expressly found Hernandez’s waivers, plea and admission were voluntary, knowing and intelligent. The trial court sentenced Hernandez in accordance with the plea agreement and awarded him presentence custody credit of 353 days. The court ordered Hernandez to pay statutory fines, fees and assessments. The special allegations were dismissed pursuant to the negotiated agreement. Hernandez filed a timely notice of appeal in which he checked the preprinted box indicating his appeal was “based on the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea.” We appointed counsel to represent Hernandez on appeal. After examination of the record counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised. On November 13, 2015, we advised Hernandez by mail he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. On November 24, 2015 the notice