Filed 7/20/23 P. v. Martinez 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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 or dered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

ERNESTO C. MARTINEZ,

Defendant and Appellant. D080816

(Super. Ct. No. SCD275948 )

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County,

Eugenia A. Eyherabide

, Judge. Affirmed.

Kevin Smith, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant

and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Ernesto C. Martinez entered into a plea agreement, in which he

pleaded guilty to first degree murder (Pen. Code, 1 § 187, subd. (a)) and

admitted he personally discharged a firearm causing death (§ 12022.53,

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.2

subd. (c)). The rem aining charges and allegations were dismissed, and the

parties stipulated to an indeterminate sentence of 45 years to life in prison.

Prior to sentencing, Martinez advised the court he wanted to withdraw

his guilty plea and proceed to trial under section 1018. Martinez claimed the

plea was a result of ignorance and mistake and that he did not understand

due to lack of an interpreter at crucial times.

The court relieved appointed counsel and appointed the alternate

public defender to represent Martinez i n his challenge to his guilty plea and

sentencing. Thereafter, a motion for new trial was filed and the court held an

evidentiary hearing.

The court denied the motion to set aside the plea and sentenced

Martinez as indicated above.

Martinez filed a tim ely notice of appeal and obtained a certificate of

probable cause. (§ 1237.5.)

Appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25

Cal.3d 436 ( Wende ) indicating counsel has not been able to identify any

arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to review the

record for error as mandated by Wende . We offered Martinez the opportunity

to file his own brief on appeal, but he has not responded.

DISCUSSION 2

As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks

the court to independently review the record for error. To assist the court in

its review, and in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738

( Ander s ), counsel has identified a possible issue that was considered in

evaluating the potential merits of this appeal: Whether the trial court erred

2 The facts of the offense are not important to the resolution of the
possible issues on this appeal. We will omit a statement of facts.3

in finding Martinez had not shown good cause to set aside the guilty plea

considering the claim of denial of a n interpreter at critical stages and his

history of brain damage from Martinez’s boxing career.

We have independently reviewed the record as required by Wende and

Anders

. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal.

Competent counse l has represented Martinez on this appeal.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.

WE CONCUR:

IRION, J.

RUBIN, J.