Filed 8/28/14 P. v. Adams 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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, D065000
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v. (Super. Ct. No. SCD247754)
RONNIE WILLIAMS ADAMS,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Eugenia
Ehyerabide, Judge. Affirmed.
Gideon Margolis, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
I.
INTRODUCTION
Defendant Ronnie Williams Adams appeals from a judgment following his plea of
guilty to one count of failing to register as a sex offender, and his admission that he has
suffered four prior strike convictions.
II.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Adams was convicted on June 13, 1984 of two offenses that required lifetime
registration as a sex offender.1 On March 27, 2013, San Diego police officer Danielle
Spilker-Wilson assisted Adams in filling out police form No. 8102, the form for sex
registrants. Adams registered himself as a "transient" on the form. After checking the
databases, Officer Spilker-Wilson determined that Adams had been registering as a
transient from June 29, 2010 through 2013.
Adams did not seem to fit the profile of a transient. Adams had listed Kaiser
Permanente as his employer. Officer Spilker-Wilson contacted Kaiser Permanente
regarding Adams's address. According to Adams's personnel file, he had listed his
address as 9060 Gramercy Drive, No. 33. Officer Spilker-Wilson contacted the
apartment manager at the Gramercy Apartments at 9072 Gramercy Drive. The apartment
manager said that Adams lived in an apartment there, and had been living there for quite
some time, in apartment 33.
1 Because Adams pled guilty, we take these facts from the evidence presented at the
preliminary hearing.
2
On April 23, 2013, Adams again registered himself with the police as a "transient"
in the area of Ruffin Road and Aero Drive. At that point, Adams was taken into custody.
After being advised of his Miranda2 rights, Adams admitted that he lived in the
apartment on Gramercy Drive. He acknowledged that he knew about the requirement
that he register as a sex offender, but explained that it was difficult for a person subject to
the sex registration requirements to rent an apartment.
Adams had apparently originally signed an 18-month lease at the Gramercy
Apartments on October 15, 2010, and had been living there after the expiration of the
original lease period on a month-to-month basis.
Adams had otherwise complied with his sex-registration requirements from 1999
until 2010.
The San Diego County District Attorney filed a felony complaint charging Adams
with one count of failing to register as a sex offender (Pen. Code, § 290.018, subd. (b);
count 1). The complaint also alleged that Adams had suffered four strike priors (Pen.
Code, §§ 667, subds. (b) through (i), 1170.12). Following a preliminary hearing, the
complaint was deemed an information. Adams entered a plea of not guilty.
Adams subsequently pled guilty to count 1 and admitted having suffered the four
strike priors.
2 Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436.
3
At sentencing, the trial court granted Adams's request to dismiss three of the strike
priors, but denied the request as to the fourth. The court sentenced Adams to the low
term of 16 months, which the court doubled to 32 months based on the strike.
Adams filed a timely notice of appeal.
III.
DISCUSSION
Adams's appointed counsel has filed a brief summarizing the facts and
proceedings below. Counsel presents no argument for reversal of the judgment, but asks
this court to review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25
Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738. Counsel identifies the
following as a possible, but not arguable, issue for our review:
"Did the trial court abuse its discretion in declining appellant's
request to dismiss the fourth strike prior?"
We granted Adams permission to file a supplemental brief on his own behalf, but
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 has disclosed no reasonably
arguable appellate issues. Adams has been competently represented by counsel on this
appeal.
4
IV.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
AARON, J.
WE CONCUR:
McCONNELL, P. J.
NARES, J.
5