1

Filed 9/8/15 P. v. Adkins 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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). Th is opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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,

v. WILLIAM D. ADKI NS, Defendant and Appellant. E063576 (Super.Ct.No. SWF1500302)
OPINION

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Judith C. Clark, Judge.
Affirmed. Nancy S. Brandt, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appel lant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, d efendant and appellant William D.
Adkins pled guilty to receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496d, subd. (a )); in return, the remaining charges and enhancement allegations were dismissed and defendant was2

sentenced to a stipulated term of one year four months in state prison with credit for time
served

. Defendant appeals from the judgment, challenging the validity of the plea based
on ineffective assistance of c ounsel

. We find no error and affirm the judgment

. I
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 1 On December 30, 2014, California Highway Patrol (CHP) Officer Margarita Gerbig saw a commercial three

- axle flatbed truck driving on Pechanga Parkway without required c ommercial vehicle markings on the truck. The officer followed the truck to the Pechanga casino and initiated a traffic stop. Officer Gerbig parked next to the truck and approached the driver of the vehicle, identified as defendant , and noticed a thin, gr een cable sticking out from underneath the driver’s side door

. Officer Gerbig informed defendant the purpose of the stop and requested defendant’s driver’s license, vehicle registration , and insurance. Defendant was unable to provide his driver’s license , claiming his wallet had been stolen. As the officer was speaking with defendant, Officer Gerbig noticed that there was a one - inch company name on the side of the flatbed in addition to a six

- digit number , but the letters “CA” as required by the Vehicle Code were missing

. Upon request, defendant provided his driver’s license number and date of birth,
which were determined to be accurate. When informed that he also needed a commercial license to drive the truck, defendant responded that “Mr. Parker” told him he did not need

1 The factual background is taken from the preliminary hearing.3

one. After defendant waived his constitutional rights, d efendant explained that he had met Parker at a gas station and that Parker had offered defendant $500 to d rive the truck to the Pechanga c asino . Defendant also stated that Parke r told him that he would meet defendant at the casino later; that Parker gave him the keys to the truck ; and that afterwards he drove the truck to a rest area and spent the night

. The following day, defendant left the truck at another rest stop, and when he returned, he found that his
wallet was missing and the truck’s ignition had been punched. Defendant then “hot

wired” the truck and drove to Temecula to deliver the truck

. CHP Officer Kenny Hagerman called the registered owner of the truck. The

owner informed Officer Hagerman that the truck had been stolen from a utility lot in Rialto on December 23, 2014. Following a preliminary hearing, o n January 28 , 2015 , a n information was filed charging defendant with unlawfully driving and taking a vehicle wi th a prior vehicle theft
conviction ( Pen. Code, § 666.5, subd. (a), Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a); count 1 ) ; receiving a stolen vehicle (Pen. Code, § 496d, subd. (a); count 2); and misdemeanor driving with a suspended license (Veh. Code, § 14601.1, subd. ( a); count 3)

. The information further alleged that defendant had suffered two prior prison terms within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b). On March 11, 2015, defendant filed a motion to suppress the warrantless detention
and search . Before the motion was heard , on March 20, 2015, d efendant entered into a negotiated plea . He pled guilty to count 2 in exchange for a stipulated term of one year4

four months in state prison , and dismissal of the remaining charges and allegations

. As
p art of his plea agreement, the People agreed that no further charges would be brought concerning property in or on the vehicle. D efendant also waived his right to appeal except issues pertaining to ineffective assistance of counsel. After directly examin ing defendant, the trial court found that defendant understood the nature of the charges and the consequences of the plea; that the plea was entered into freely, voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently; and that there was a factual basis for the plea. On April 3, 2015, d efendant was sentenced in accordance with his plea agreement and awarded 189 days presentence credit for time served

. On May 11, 2015, defendant filed a notice of appeal and request for certificate of probable cause, challenging the v alidity of the plea based on ineffective assistance of
counsel . On May 13, 2015, the trial court granted defendant’s request for certificate of probable cause.
II
DISCUSSION After defendant appealed, upon his request, this court appointed counsel to
rep resent 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 thi s court to conduct an independent review of the record.5

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 t he 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
RAMIREZ P. J. We concur:

HOLLENHORST J.

McKINSTER J.