People v. Sefein CA4/1

Filed 10/3/23 P. v. Sefein CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D080967

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. Nos. SCD282524, SCE392705) KIRELLOS SEFEIN,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from judgments of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Daniel Link, Judge. Affirmed. Richard Jay Moller, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. This appeal arises out of guilty pleas in two separate cases. The pleas were taken at the same time and were later sentenced at the same time. The combined cases were resolved with grants of summary felony probation for two years.

Case No. SCE392705 Kirellos Sefein pleaded guilty to one count of receiving stolen property

(Pen. Code,1 § 496d) as part of a plea agreement in which the court agreed to delay sentencing for one year to allow Sefein to pay restitution and receive counselling. When the matter was called for sentencing, Sefein ultimately provided proof of payment of restitution and participation in a substantial amount of sentencing. The court declined to reduce the conviction to a misdemeanor, but did grant summary felony probation with credit for Sefein’s time in custody. Sefein filed a notice of appeal. Case No. SCD282524 Sefein pleaded guilty to one count of grand theft of personal property valued in excess of $950. The plea was entered under the same plea agreement and was subject to the same conditions as in case No. SCE392705. Ultimately Sefein was also granted summary felony probation for two years. Sefein filed a notice of appeal. Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), indicating counsel has not been able to identify any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to independently review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered Sefein the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal, but he has not responded. These convictions follow from guilty pleas thus there was no evidentiary hearing to determine the facts of the offenses. We will not construct a statement of facts in this case.