P. v. Sanchez CA2/8

Filed 3/25/13 P. v. Sanchez CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B243630

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA 392915) v.

ENRIQUE SANCHEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Henry J. Hall, Judge. Affirmed.

David L. Kelly, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

******

Appellant Enrique Sanchez was convicted of one count of unlawful taking a vehicle with a prior for a related offense. Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), appellant’s counsel filed an opening brief requesting that this court review the record and determine whether any arguable issues exist on appeal. We have reviewed the entire record and find no arguable issue. We affirm the judgment. PROCEDURE On February 24, 2012, appellant was charged with unlawful driving or taking a vehicle with a prior for unlawful driving or taking a vehicle. (Pen. Code, § 666.5.) In addition to the alleged prior for unlawful driving or taking a vehicle, it was alleged appellant suffered two prior serious or violent felony convictions within the meaning of the “Three Strikes” law. It was further alleged appellant suffered five prison terms within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b). On the first day of trial, the court denied appellant’s motion to represent himself. Appellant was not prepared to go to trial, and the court found that his motion was untimely and was brought for the purpose of delay. The court bifurcated trial on the prior unlawful driving or taking a vehicle. Jurors found appellant guilty of unlawful driving or taking a vehicle. Appellant waived jury trial on the priors. The court found the priors true. In addition to the charged crimes, the court found appellant committed an uncharged robbery and had been regularly committing crimes since 1976. The court granted appellant’s Romero motion, striking one of the serious or violent prior felonies. (People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497.) The court struck the prior conviction because the People elected to try appellant as if the current conviction were a second strike (not a third strike). The court sentenced appellant to a 12-year prison term.