People v. Johnson CA5

California Court of Appeal Jun 7, 2024 No. F086571Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the defendant's judgment and sentence after finding no arguable error in the record following an independent review pursuant to People v. Wende. The court specifically rejected the defendant's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and an involuntary plea, noting the record confirmed the defendant understood and agreed to the 42-year eight-month sentence.

Issues

Whether the trial court abused its sentencing discretion.
Whether the defendant's plea was entered voluntarily and knowingly.
Whether the defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel regarding the plea agreement.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm.”

“Having carefully reviewed the entire record, we conclude there are no arguable issues on appeal.”

“Our review of the record submitted in this appeal fails to disclose evidence supporting any of the standards set out in Mai.”

Filed 6/7/24 P. v. Johnson CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, F086571 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. BF171276A) v.

TYRONE JOHNSON, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Colette M. Humphrey, Judge. Steven A. Torres, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Levy, Acting P. J., Peña, J. and Snauffer, J.

Appellate counsel for defendant Tyrone Johnson has filed an opening brief summarizing the pertinent facts and raising no issues but asking this court to review the record independently. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) The opening brief also includes a declaration from appellate counsel stating defendant was advised of his right to file a brief of his own with this court. By letter dated February 13, 2024, we also invited defendant to submit additional briefing. While defendant asked for and received an extension of time to submit additional briefing, he did not file a response. Pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have reviewed the entire record. Following our Supreme Court’s direction in Kelly, we provide a brief description of the facts and the procedural history of the case. (Kelly, at p. 110.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY An information consolidated two separate criminal cases brought against defendant and a codefendant on April 5, 2022.1 The amended consolidated information charged defendant with murder (Pen. Code,2 § 187, a felony; count 1), assault with a semiautomatic weapon (§ 245, subd. (b), a felony; counts 2, 4 & 6), attempted murder (§§ 664/187, subd. (a), a felony; counts 3 & 5), entering an inhabited dwelling to commit larceny or any felony (§ 460, subd. (a), a felony; count 7), being a felon in possession of a firearm (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1), a felony; counts 8 & 10), escape from a justice facility (§ 4532, subd. (b)(1), a felony; count 11), evasion in a motor vehicle (Veh. Code,

People v. Johnson CA5

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief