People v. Seymour CA2/3

California Court of Appeal May 19, 2021 No. B309183Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the judgment after finding no arguable issues upon independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende and denying the defendant's motion to augment the record.

Issues

Whether the trial court erred in denying the defendant's motion to augment the record with missing reporter's transcripts.
Whether there are any arguable issues on appeal following a negotiated plea without a certificate of probable cause.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Seymour has not shown how the materials he requested are useful to the instant appeal. Therefore, the motion is denied.”

“Turning to whether there are any arguable issues on appeal, our review of the record shows there are none.”

“With respect to sentencing or postplea issues that do not in substance challenge the validity of the plea itself, we have examined the record, and are satisfied no arguable issues exist”

Filed 5/19/21 P. v. Seymour CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE

THE PEOPLE, B309183 (Los Angeles County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. BA447184)

AARON DEON SEYMOUR,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Jose I. Sandoval, Judge. Affirmed. Aaron Deon Seymour, in pro. per.; and Richard B. Lennon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. ——————————

Pursuant to a negotiated plea, Aaron Deon Seymour pleaded no contest to two counts of robbery in violation of Penal Code1 section 211. We affirm the judgment. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On June 27, 2016, an amended felony complaint charged Seymour with 10 counts of robbery. (§ 211.) In six of them, it was alleged that he used a firearm in committing the offenses. (§ 12022.53, sub. (b).) It was also alleged that Seymour had a prior serious felony conviction under the “Three Strikes” law (§§ 667, 667.5, subd. (b), 1170.12) for a 2006 conviction for manslaughter. The appellate record does not contain any other information regarding the underlying facts supporting the allegations. Initially, Seymour pleaded not guilty to all charges. Before the preliminary hearing, on May 15, 2017, the court declared Seymour incompetent and suspended criminal proceedings pursuant to section 1368. On October 18, 2018, Seymour was restored to competency and the court reinstituted criminal proceedings. When proceedings resumed, pursuant to a negotiated disposition, Seymour waived his preliminary hearing and trial rights, pleaded no contest to two counts of robbery, and admitted the prior strike. The court sentenced Seymour to 17 years in state prison. The sentence consisted of a five-year term for the first count, doubled to 10 years because of the strike, a consecutive one-year sentence for the second count, doubled to

People v. Seymour CA2/3

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

AARON DEON SEYMOUR,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

EDMON, P. J.

LAVIN, J.

AI Brief