People v. Mancha CA4/1

Filed 6/12/14 P. v. Mancha CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, D064797 Plaintiff and Respondent, v. (Super. Ct. No. SCS265572) OSCAR CARLOS MANCHA, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Frances M. Devaney, Judge. Affirmed. Christian C. Buckley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. The People charged Oscar Carlos Mancha with illegal possession of a firearm (Pen. Code, § 30305, subd. (a)(1); count 1); and possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a); count 2). As to both counts, it was alleged that he had suffered a strike within the meaning of the "Three Strikes" law. (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 667, subds. (b)-(i).) Mancha pleaded guilty to the two counts, and admitted the enhancement allegation as to count 1 only. In exchange, the People dismissed the enhancement allegation as to count 2. The court sentenced Mancha to a stipulated term of 40 months in prison. Before taking the plea, the court verified Mancha had signed and discussed the change of plea form with his attorney, who had satisfactorily answered Mancha's questions. The court asked if Mancha was freely and voluntarily giving up his right to a trial, and Mancha replied in the affirmative. DISCUSSION Appointed counsel has filed a brief summarizing the facts and proceedings in the trial court. 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 possible but not arguable issue of whether Mancha's plea was knowing and voluntary. We granted Mancha permission to file a brief on his own behalf, but he did not do so. Our review of the entire record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, including the possible issue referred to by appellate counsel has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issues. Mancha was competently represented by counsel on this appeal. 2 DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed. O'ROURKE, J. WE CONCUR: BENKE, Acting P. J. McDONALD, J. 3