People v. Vella CA1/4

Filed 11/28/23 P. v. Vella CA1/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A167020 v. JOHN ANTHONY VELLA, (Del Norte County Super. Defendant and Appellant. Ct. No. CRPB215073)

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 John Vella appeals from the trial court’s imposition of a two-year sentence arising from his conviction by plea for violating Penal Code section 4573.6.2 Vella contends that the trial court erroneously imposed a full two-year sentence to run consecutively to a separate term imposed by a Mendocino County court for a violation of section 69. Under section 1170.1, subdivision (a) and People v. Brantley (2019) 43 Cal.App.5th 917 (Brantley), Vella contends, the trial court was not permitted to impose the full two-year term but instead should have imposed a one-year “subordinate” term for the section 4573.6 conviction. He argues that the trial court selected the two-

1 We resolve this case by memorandum opinion pursuant to the

California Standards of Judicial Administration, section 8.1. 2 Further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

year term because it improperly applied section 1170.1, subdivision (c), rather than subdivision (a). Vella also argues, relying on Brantley, that the trial court erred by failing to pronounce a single, aggregate sentence. The Attorney General concedes the legal principles underlying Vella’s claim of error. Relying on People v. Panizzon (1996) 13 Cal.4th 68 (Panizzon), however, the Attorney General argues that Vella expressly agreed to the two- year term as an integral component of his guilty plea. As a result, Vella cannot now appeal from the sentence without having received a certificate of probable cause pursuant to section 1237.5. In addition, the Attorney General contends, Vella waived his right to appeal his sentence as part of his plea agreement. Vella handwrote the following on his plea form: “I plead guilty to count 1. I will receive a 2 year low term consecutive to my present term. Case CRPB22-5038 will be dismissed. Strikes to be dropped.” Case CRPB22- 5038 refers to a separate charge against Vella for failing to appear in court, and the dropped “strikes” refers to a strike for a prior conviction that could have doubled his sentence for the section 4573.6 charge. The section on the plea form describing the “bargain” refers back to Vella’s handwritten statement. Vella initialed the section of the plea form stating: “I waive my right to appeal possible legal errors in any proceeding or rulings to this time.” He also completed and initialed the section of the form that stated he “had sufficient consultation with [his] attorney,” who “explained everything on this declaration,” and that he “had sufficient time to consider the meaning of each statement” on the form. He confirmed that his initials signified his understanding of those statements and signed the form. Vella’s counsel also completed and signed a section of the plea form that stated: “I have personally explained the contents of the above declaration to the defendant,