PEOPLE v. SALGADO

No. D071099.

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MAURICIO SALGADO, Defendant and Appellant.

Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, Division One.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Appellate Defenders, Inc. and Siri Shetty , under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

HUFFMAN, J.

Mauricio Salgado entered into a plea agreement, under the terms of which he pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated sexual assault (Pen. Code,1 § 269, subd. (a)). Salgado admitted the offense involved substantial sexual conduct. He also stipulated to a prison term of 15 years to life. The remaining charges were dismissed. The court sentenced Salgado consistent with the plea agreement.

Salgado did not obtain a certificate of probable cause, but did file a timely notice of appeal.

Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) indicating counsel has not been able to identify any arguable issue for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered Salgado the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal. He has filed a supplemental letter, which we will discuss below.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Since this appeal arises from a guilty plea with a stipulated sentence, we will take the summary of the facts of the offense from the change of plea.

Salgado admitted that he did unlawfully commit sexual penetration of a child under the age of 14 years of age and was seven or more years younger than him.

DISCUSSION

As we have noted counsel has not been able to identify any arguable issue for reversal on appeal and has asked this court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436. Consistent with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel has identified the following possible, but not arguable issue for our consideration:

Whether Salgado was properly sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement.

Salgado has filed a letter, in the nature of a supplemental brief. Salgado basically contends he is not guilty, others have lied and the incident was not his fault. All of his representations are matters outside the record. The appeal was not accompanied by a certificate of probable cause (§ 1237.5) and is thus limited to matters occurring after the plea. If Salgado has facts that would undermine his conviction or demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel his remedy, if any, is by way of petition for writ of habeas corpus. (People v. Mendoza Tello (1997) 15 Cal.4th 264, 266-267.)

We have reviewed the entire record and have not identified any arguable issue for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Salgado on this appeal.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

McCONNELL, P. J. and AARON, J., concurs.

FootNotes


1. All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified.

Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases