People v. Pack CA2/7

Filed 11/3/20 P. v. Pack CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B300931

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. LA089914) v.

CHARLES RAY PACK,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Mildred Escobedo, Judge. Dismissed.

Sarvenaz Bahar, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. ________

Charles Ray Pack appeals from an order denying his postjudgment motion to withdraw his plea. Because he failed to obtain a certificate of probable cause, the trial court’s denial of his motion to withdraw his plea is not appealable. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On July 16, 2019, in a negotiated plea agreement, Pack pleaded no contest to one count of elder abuse (Pen. Code, § 368, subd. (b)(1)) and one count of false imprisonment by violence (§ 236), and he admitted the special allegation as to the elder abuse count that he inflicted great bodily injury (§12022.7, subd. (a)). Pack also admitted he suffered a prior conviction of a serious or violent felony, which constituted a strike within the meaning of the three strikes law (§§ 667, subds. (a)(1), (b)-(i), 1170.12). As part of the negotiated plea, Pack waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. The trial court sentenced Pack pursuant to the terms of the plea agreement to an aggregate state prison term of 12 years four months. On July 23, 2019 Pack, represented by counsel, moved to withdraw his plea. Pack asserted his medication for back pain and his mental condition impaired his judgment and prevented him from understanding the nature and consequences of his plea. In addition, Pack believed he “was rushed” to decide whether to enter a plea or go to trial after the trial court denied his motion to represent himself pursuant to Faretta v. California (1975) 422 U.S. 806 and his motion for a continuance to retain private counsel. Following a hearing, the court denied Pack’s motion to withdraw the plea.