People v. Mendez CA3

Filed 5/17/24 P. v. Mendez CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (San Joaquin) ----

THE PEOPLE, C099553

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. STKCR202013902) v.

RAYMOND RICHARD MENDEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Raymond Richard Mendez pled guilty to two counts of voluntary manslaughter and one count of evading a police officer and admitted various enhancements in exchange for a stipulated sentence of 27 years 8 months in prison. Defendant’s appointed counsel filed an opening brief raising no legal issues and asking this court to independently review the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Having done so, we affirm. BACKGROUND Defendant and his codefendant went to a park in Stockton where a gang fight was about to start. Once the victims arrived, defendant walked through the park to a victim’s car. Defendant quickly fired into that victim’s car, and one or more of the other victims

1

returned fire. Two victims died. When defendant was spotted by officers, he was driving erratically while speeding and throwing things out of the car window. The operative complaint charged defendant with two counts of murder, one count of attempted premeditated murder, shooting at a vehicle, being a felon in possession of a firearm, criminal street gang activity, and evading a peace officer. It alleged special circumstances for the murders and various enhancements. Finally, it alleged defendant had a strike and a serious felony conviction. Defendant pled guilty to two counts of voluntary manslaughter and one count of evading a police officer. He admitted using a firearm, a strike, and a serious felony conviction. In exchange, the trial court dismissed the remaining counts and enhancements. In keeping with the plea agreement, the trial court sentenced defendant to 27 years 8 months in prison and imposed restitution and various fines and fees. DISCUSSION We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and, pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, requesting the court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. Counsel advised defendant of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief, and he has not done so. After independently reviewing the record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.