IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Mono)
May 23, 2011
THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
SEAN FRANCIS WANAMAKER, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
(Super. Ct. No. MFE09002785)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Nicholson, J.
P. v. Wanamaker
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
This is an appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).
On April 30, 2009, while at a party in a three-story house, defendant Sean Francis Wanamaker broke into several locked rooms where occupants were sleeping. Defendant stole property and money belonging to four occupants.
Defendant entered a negotiated no contest plea to first degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459) with four named occupants present, as a strike (Pen. Code, § 667, subd. (b)) and as a serious and violent felony (Pen. Code, §§ 667.5, subd. (c)(21); 1192.7, subd. (c)(18)), in exchange for dismissal of the remaining count (grand theft of personal property) and a sentencing lid of the midterm of four years.*fn1
Finding unusual circumstances, the court granted probation for a term of five years subject to certain terms and conditions including that defendant serve 365 days in jail. The court ordered defendant not to consume or possess alcohol or enter any place where alcoholic beverages are the primary items of sale.
A request for revocation of probation alleged that defendant failed to obey all laws, failed to abstain from alcohol, entered a place where alcoholic beverages were the primary items of sale, was under the influence in a public place, resisted arrest, and gave false identification to the police. The People added an allegation that defendant committed a battery.
Defendant, who had been drinking at a bar in Mammoth Lakes, and another man got into a fight. When police arrived, defendant gave a false name and resisted arrest.
Defendant admitted all probation allegations and the People dismissed a felony charge of assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury in view of defendant's admissions. Defendant later orally moved to withdraw his admissions and his attorney's motion to withdraw as counsel due to conflict was granted. With new counsel, defendant's written motion to withdraw his admissions was denied after an evidentiary hearing at which defendant testified.
The court denied continued probation and sentenced defendant to state prison for the midterm of four years for the burglary offense.*fn2
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.*fn3
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: RAYE , P. J. HOCH , J.