Filed 7/24/15 P. v. Williams CA4/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent, E062659
v. (Super.Ct.No. FVI1102487)
BRIAN O’NEAL WILLIAMS, OPINION
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Miriam Ivy
Morton, Judge. Affirmed.
Jared M. Hartman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, defendant and appellant Brian O’Neal
Williams pled no contest to attempted failure to register as a sex offender annually
(Pen. Code, §§ 664, 290.011, subd. (a)); in return, the remaining allegations were
1
dismissed and defendant was sentenced to a stipulated term of eight months in state
prison with credit for time served. Defendant appeals, challenging the sentence or other
matters occurring after the plea, as well as the validity of the plea. We find no error and
affirm.
I
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND1
In 1985, defendant was convicted of kidnapping (Pen. Code, § 207) and rape by
force (Pen. Code, § 261) in Los Angeles County and was required to register as a sex
offender.
On October 4, 2011, a San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department detective
responsible for sex offender registration compliance discovered that defendant’s last date
of registration was September 2, 2010, as a transient, and that defendant had failed to
register annually as required by Penal Code section 290. Defendant also had an active
arrest warrant for violating parole and his whereabouts were unknown.
On October 27, 2011, a felony complaint was filed charging defendant with
transient failing to register annually (Pen. Code, § 290.11, subd. (c); count 1) and failure
to advise prior agency of move (Pen. Code, § 290.013; count 2). The complaint further
alleged that defendant had suffered two prior prison terms. (Pen. Code, § 667.5,
subd. (b).)
1 The factual background is taken from the sheriff’s reports.
2
On November 2, 2011, an arrest warrant was issued for defendant. Three years
later, on November 19, 2014, defendant was eventually found to be in custody. On
November 26, 2014, the complaint was amended to add attempted failure to register
annually (Pen. Code, §§ 664, 290.011, subd. (a); count 3), as a lesser included offense to
count 1. Defendant thereafter entered into a negotiated plea and pled no contest to
count 3 in exchange for a stipulated term of eight months in state prison.
After directly examining defendant, the trial court found that defendant had read
and understood his declaration and the plea form; that defendant understood the nature of
the charges and the consequences of the plea; that defendant had knowingly, intelligently,
freely, and voluntarily waived his constitutional rights; that the plea was entered into
freely, voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently; and that there was a factual basis for the
plea. Defendant was thereafter immediately sentenced to eight months in state prison in
accordance with his plea agreement and awarded 46 days credit for time served.
On December 30, 2014, defendant filed a notice of appeal and a request for a
certificate of probable cause, challenging the validity of the plea. In his request for a
certificate of probable cause, defendant claimed that he was “incompetent to the fact” that
he would be serving a “new prison conviction” and believed that his sentence would run
concurrent with a parole violation. On December 30, 2014, the trial court granted
defendant’s request for a certificate of probable cause.
On January 26, 2015, an amended notice of appeal was filed, challenging the
sentence or other matters occurring after the plea, as well as the validity of the plea.
3
II
DISCUSSION
After defendant appealed, upon his request, this court appointed counsel to
represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979)
25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, setting forth a statement of
the case, a summary of the facts and potential arguable issues, and requesting this court
conduct an independent review of the record.
We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, and he
has not done so.
Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have
independently reviewed the entire record for potential error and find no arguable error
that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
III
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
McKINSTER
J.
We concur:
RAMIREZ
P. J.
CODRINGTON
J.
4