Filed 9/27/13 P. v. Pollard CA4/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE, D063092
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v. (Super. Ct. No. SCE324263)
JOE BRANDON POLLARD,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Charles W.
Ervin, Judge. Affirmed.
David K. Rankin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
INTRODUCTION
On October 16, 2012, after the court advised him of his constitutional rights and
the potential consequences of his plea, defendant Joe Brandon Pollard indicated he was
freely and voluntarily giving up those rights and pleaded guilty to one count of attempted
possession of a controlled substance (methamphetamine) (Health and Saf. Code, § 11377,
subd. (a) & Pen. Code, § 664) as a lesser included offense of count 1 of the felony
complaint. Pollard admitted an allegation that he had suffered one strike prior (Pen.
Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12 & 668). The plea bargain stipulated a sentence of
16 months in state prison.
The court granted the prosecution's motion to dismiss allegations Pollard had
suffered two prison priors (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)), and immediately sentenced
him to the stipulated 16-month prison term. The court granted Pollard a total of 37 days
of presentence custody credit and imposed various fees and fines, including a restitution
fine and a suspended parole revocation fine.
In his notice of appeal, Pollard indicated his appeal is "based on the sentence or
other matters that occurred after the plea and do not affect its validity."
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
For purposes of the change of plea hearing, Pollard admitted as the factual basis
for his guilty plea that he "unlawfully attempted to possess a controlled substance."
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief summarizing the proceedings below.
Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks this court to review the record for
error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v.
California (1967) 386 U. S. 738, counsel refers to the following as possible, but not
arguable, issues: (1) Was Pollard "properly advised of his rights prior to entering the plea
2
bargain?"; (2) "[i]s there a factual basis for his plea?"; and (3) "[d]id [he] receive the
agreed sentence?"
We granted Pollard permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not
responded.
A review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, and
Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, including the possible issues raised by
appellate counsel, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issue. The record
shows Pollard was properly advised of his rights before he entered his guilty plea and
admitted the strike prior allegation, there is a factual basis for his plea, and he received
the sentence the parties agreed he would receive. We conclude Pollard has been
adequately represented by counsel on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NARES, J.
WE CONCUR:
BENKE, Acting P. J.
IRION, J.
3