Filed 4/30/14 P. v. Solomon CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication o r ordered published for purposes of rule 8.111.5.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

GORDON BARRINGTON SOLOMON,

Defendant and Appellant. 2d Crim. No. B252760 (Super. Ct. No. YA084788) (Los Angeles County)

Gordon Solomon appeals from the j udgment entered after the trial court denied a motion to withdraw appellant's no cont est plea to three counts of lewd act upon a child (Counts 1, 2, & 4); Pen. Code, § 288, subd . (a); oral copulation of a person under the age of 14 (count 3; § 288a, subd. (c)(1)), continuous sexual ab use (count 5; § 288.5, subd. (a), four counts of lewd act upon a child (cou nts 6-9; § 288, subd. (c)(1)), three counts of sodomy of a person under the ag e of 16 (counts 10-12; § 286, subd. (b)(2)), and dissuading a witness from reporting a crime (count 13; § 136.1, subd. (b)(1).) On counts 1, 2, 4, and 5, appellant admitted that he had substantial sexua l contact with a victim under the age of 14 (§ 1203.066, su bd. (a)(8)). Before the change of plea was entere d, appellant rejected the prosecution's offer of 19 years four months state prison. Appellant was advised that the maximum sentence was 35 years eight months and, against the advice of trial coun sel, made an open plea so that he would receive a full senten cing hearing to determine his sentence.2 At the May 31, 2013 sentencing heari ng, the prosecutor argued for a 29 year four month sentence and appellant 's trial counsel argued for a low-term minimum sentence. The trial court sentenced appellant to 29 ye ars four months state prison and ordered appellant to pay a $280 restitution fine (§ 12 02.4, subd. (b)), a $280 parole revocation fine (§ 1202.45), a $300 sexua l habitual offender fine (§ 290. 3.), a $250 court security fee (§ 1465.8), and a $390 conviction a ssessment (Gov. Code, § 70373). On July 30, 2013, appellant retain ed new counsel and filed a motion to withdraw the plea on the ground that prior counsel was constitutionally ineffective. After the trial judge (Judge Eric Taylor) recused hi mself, the motion to withdraw the plea was heard by Judge Mark Arnold. The trial cour t conducted a lengthy evidentiary hearing and denied the motion on the ground that appellant was not prejudiced by trial counsel's errors within the meaning of Strickland v. Washington (1984) 466 U.S. 688 [80 L.Ed.2d 674]. The trial court found that appellant knew that the maximum possible sentence was 35 years eight months; that appellant rejected an offer of 19 years four months and entered the change of plea against the advice of trial counsel; that the change of plea was freely, voluntarily and intelligently made and that, but for counsel's alleged erro rs, there is no reasonable probability that the result of the proceeding w ould have been more favorable. Appellant filed a notice of appeal and a request for certif icate of probable cause which was denied by the trial court. (§ 1237.5, subd. (a).) We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. After coun sel’s examination of the record, he filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised. On March 24, 2014, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. On April 21, 2014, appellant submitted a letter brief stating, among other things, th at he was denied effective

assistance of counsel because trial counsel was "confused" about the maximum possible sentence and told appellant that the open plea wa s "the best thing to do." These contentions are not supported by the record. ( Strickland v. Washington, supra, 446 U.S. at p. 687 [89 L.Ed.2d at p. 693]; People v. Bolin (1998) 18 Cal.4th 297, 333.) Appellant failed to3 establish a reasonable probability that, but for trial counsel's errors, appellant would not have pleaded guilty and would have obtained a more favor able result had he proceeded to trial. (See e.g., People v. Fairbank (1997) 16 Cal.4th 1223, 1 241-1242.) The change of plea was based on the probation report, police re ports, and the preliminary hearing transcript which reflect that appellant, a church pastor, se xually assaulted the victim at church and at home, told two church board members about the sexual assau lts, planned to mortgage the

church to create a trust fund for a victim, threatened to flee to Belize, and sent email to one

of the victims.

We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that a ppellant's attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no ar guable issues exist. ( People v.

Wende (1979) 25 Cal. 3d 436, 443; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 126.) The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

YEGAN, J.

We concur:

GILBERT, P.J.

PERREN, J.4 Eric C. Taylor, Judge

Superior Court County of Los Angeles

________________ ______________

Richard L.. Fitzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Appellant.

No appearance for Respondent.