Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

The People v. Nels Christian Propp

November 20, 2012

THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
NELS CHRISTIAN PROPP, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.



(Super. Ct. No. 10F7060)

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Butz , J.

P. v. Propp

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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

Defendant Nels Christian Propp entered a plea of no contest to possession of methamphetamine and admitted a strike prior in exchange for a stipulated four-year state prison sentence. The court sentenced defendant accordingly, that is, the two-year midterm, doubled for the strike prior.

Defendant appeals. The trial court denied defendant's request for a certificate of probable cause. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5.)*fn1 Defendant contends (1) remand is required so that the trial court may entertain a Romero*fn2 motion and (2) the amount of a penalty assessment on a fee must be reduced. We reject both contentions and shall affirm.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

In view of defendant's contentions, only a brief statement of facts is necessary. On September 6, 2010, a parole search of defendant revealed marijuana, a gram of methamphetamine, hydrocodone pills, and a fraudulent $5 bill.

DISCUSSION

I. Opportunity to Present a Romero Motion

Defendant contends that the matter should be remanded to the trial court for a hearing on a Romero motion because the original negotiated plea agreement provided for a Romero motion and no one addressed the issue at sentencing. Defendant contends his sentence is void since his plea to the methamphetamine offense was induced in part by the representation that he had the right to bring a Romero motion. He argues that he did not receive the benefit of the plea bargain. The People respond that defendant has forfeited his right to raise the issue by failing to present a Romero motion in the trial court. We conclude that defendant's admission of the strike prior in exchange for a stipulated sentence precludes remand.

A. Background

In case No. 10F7060, an information charged defendant with possession of hydrocodone, possession of methamphetamine, making, possessing, and uttering a fictitious instrument, and possession of 28.5 grams or less of marijuana, a misdemeanor. It was further alleged that defendant had a strike prior (Pen. Code, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.