Filed 4/16/14 P. v. Banks 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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, D064573
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v. (Super. Ct. No. SCD245382)
NAKIA TROY BANKS,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Laura W.
Halgren, Judge. Affirmed.
Appellate Defenders, Inc., and Cindi B. Mishkin, under appointment by the Court
of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
I.
INTRODUCTION
Nakia Troy Banks pled guilty to one count of possessing marijuana for sale
(Health and Saf. Code, § 11359)1 (count 1). At sentencing, the trial court suspended
imposition of sentence and placed Banks on formal probation for three years.
Appointed appellate counsel filed a brief presenting no argument for reversal, but
inviting this court to review the record for error in accordance with People v. Wende
(1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). After having independently reviewed the entire record
for error as required by Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders) and Wende,
we affirm.
II.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In January 2013, the People filed a complaint against Banks alleging one count of
possessing marijuana for sale (§ 11359) (count 1) and one count of resisting a peace
officer (Pen. Code, § 148, subd. (a)(1)) (count 2). The People further alleged that Banks
had served a prior prison term within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5,
subdivision (b).
In February 2013, the trial court expressed a doubt as to Banks's competence,
suspended proceedings pursuant to Penal Code section 1368, and committed Banks to a
1 All subsequent statutory references are to the Health and Safety Code, unless
otherwise specified.
2
state hospital. Approximately six months later, the court found Banks competent and
reinstated criminal proceedings.
On August 12, 2013, Banks entered into a plea agreement with the People. In
exchange for his plea of guilty to count one, the People agreed to dismiss the remaining
counts and further agreed that Banks would be placed on formal probation. That same
day, the trial court held a change of plea hearing, accepted Banks's plea of guilty, and
granted the People's motion to dismiss the remaining counts.
In September 2013, the trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed
Banks on formal probation for a three-year term. The court also granted Banks 386 days
of presentence credit.
Banks filed a timely notice of appeal.2
III.
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief summarizing the facts and
proceedings in the trial court. Counsel presented no argument for reversal but invited this
court to review the record for error in accordance with Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.
Pursuant to Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738, counsel identified the following as possible, but
not arguable, issues:
"Is appellant's plea constitutionally valid?"
2 Although Banks filed a signed request for a certificate of probable cause (see Pen.
Code, § 1237.5), his request did not contain any text, and the trial court did not rule on
the request.
3
"Did the trial court comply with its duty under Penal Code section
1192.5 to establish a sufficient factual basis for the guilty plea?"
"Did the trial court abuse its discretion by suspending imposition of
sentence and ordering appellant to serve a three-year . . . probation
term?"
After this court received counsel's brief, we provided Banks with the opportunity
to file a supplemental brief. Banks did not file a supplemental brief.
A review of the record pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, and Anders,
supra, 386 U.S. 738, including the issues suggested by counsel, has disclosed no
reasonably arguable appellate issue. Banks has been adequately represented by counsel
on this appeal.
IV.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
AARON, J.
WE CONCUR:
McCONNELL, P. J.
HALLER, J.
4