People v. Schiele CA3

Filed 4/14/22 P. v. Schiele CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C094487

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 18FE020663)

v.

FREDERICK JAMES SCHIELE,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Frederick James Schiele has asked this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Our review of the record has disclosed that although defendant’s plea deal called for dismissal of the balance of the charges, the trial court failed to affirmatively dismiss those charges following defendant’s no contest plea and sentencing. We will modify the judgment to address this oversight. Finding no other arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment as modified.

1

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The People’s October 29, 2018 felony complaint charged defendant with 18 counts of lewd and lascivious acts with a child under the age of 14 (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a)—counts one through eighteen)1 and arranging a meeting with a child for the purpose of committing a lewd act (§ 288.4, subd. (b)—count nineteen). It further was alleged that in the commission of the section 288 counts, defendant had substantial sexual contact with a person under 14 (§ 1203.066, subd. (a)(8)). On April 16, 2019, defendant was held to answer as charged and the complaint was deemed the information. Thereafter, on May 20, 2021, defendant resolved this case by pleading no contest to counts two through four, six, and eight through eleven. In exchange, he would receive a prison sentence of 22 years and the remaining charges would be dismissed. The factual basis for defendant’s plea was recited by the prosecution for the record and included that defendant had placed his fingers to the victim’s vagina, kissed her with his tongue, placed his penis to the victim’s vagina, placed his penis to the victim’s mouth, and placed his mouth to the victim’s genitalia. Defendant had been dating the victim’s mother at the time and “was essentially the victim’s stepfather.” The abuse continued almost every day for over a year when the victim was between the ages of 10 and 11. It only ended when the victim’s mother and defendant broke up. Defendant objected that he did not believe that any of the complained of conduct had occurred before the victim was 11 years old, but otherwise submitted on the facts as stated by the People. On June 22, 2021, the trial court sentenced defendant in accordance with the plea agreement to an aggregate prison term of 22 years, comprised of eight years for count two, plus two years consecutive for each remaining count. However, the court neglected to orally dismiss the balance of the charges and strike the enhancement allegation.