People v. Perea CA3

Filed 7/20/16 P. v. Perea CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C080321

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 14F03028)

v.

SILVIO REUBEN PEREA,

Defendant and Appellant.

This is an appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). On May 4, 2014, defendant Silvio Reuben Perea was stopped at a driving under the influence (DUI) checkpoint. He was driving with a blood-alcohol content (BAC) of 0.23 percent (measured with a blood test) and on a suspended license due to prior DUI convictions. Defendant entered an “open” plea of no contest to driving with a BAC of

1

0.08 percent or more, a felony (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (b); count two), and driving on a suspended license, a misdemeanor (Veh. Code, § 14601.2, subd. (a); count three). In connection with count two, defendant admitted that he was driving with a BAC of 0.20 percent or more and that he had three prior DUI convictions. (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (b); 2004, 2006, 2008.) Defendant admitted a strike prior (1986 involuntary manslaughter “with personal infliction of great bodily injury”) (Pen. Code, § 667, subds. (b)-(i)) and three prior prison term allegations (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). After denying defendant’s request that the court strike the strike prior, the court sentenced defendant to state prison for an aggregate term of nine years as follows: count two, the upper term of three years, doubled for the strike prior; one year each for the three prior prison terms; and count three, a concurrent 60-day county jail term. Defendant appeals. He did not seek a certificate of probable cause. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5.) We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant. I We requested supplemental briefing on “whether the term on count three (misdemeanor driving on a suspended license) should be stayed to comply with the plea agreement.”1 Defendant and the People filed their respective supplemental letter briefs