Filed 11/13/14 P. v. McKenry CA5 

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS 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 This opinion has not been certified for publication 

or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, 

Plaintiff and Respondent, 

 v. 

MATTHEW ALEXANDER McKENRY, 

Defendant and Appellant. 

F067660 

(Super. Ct. No. F13903231) 

OPINION

THE COURT* 

 APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. F. Brian 

Alvarez, Judge. 

 Carol L. Foster, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and 

Appellant. 

 Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and 

Respondent. 

-ooOoo- 

 

* Before Gomes, Acting P.J., Detjen, J. and Franson, J. 
2. 

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

 On April 11, 2013, Matthew Alexander McKenry (defendant) was charged by 

complaint with possession of a firearm by a felon (Pen. Code,1 § 29800, subd. (a)(1); 

count 1), possession of ammunition by a person prohibited from owning a firearm 

(§ 30305, subd. (a); count 2), carrying a concealed firearm on his person (§ 25400, 

subd. (a)(2); count 3), possession of methamphetamine while armed with a loaded, 

operable firearm (Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.1, subd. (a); count 4), possession of a 

firearm with identification numbers removed (§ 23920; count 5), and possession of a 

switchblade in a vehicle (§ 21510, subd. (a); count 6). It was further alleged he had 

served two prior prison terms. (§ 667.5, subd. (b).) 

 On April 24, 2013, the parties entered into a plea agreement covering two cases, 

Nos. F13902897 and F13903231. It was agreed defendant would receive a maximum 

term of three years in the latter case, with sentences in the two cases to run concurrently.2 

Defendant waived his right to a preliminary hearing, and his constitutional rights 

pursuant to Boykin v. Alabama (1969) 395 U.S. 238 and In re Tahl (1969) 1 Cal.3d 122. 

The court advised defendant of the consequences of an admission of guilt. Defendant 

pled no contest to count 1 and admitted serving two prior prison terms. The parties 

stipulated that if the court were to review the police reports, it would conclude there was 

a factual basis for the plea pursuant to People v. West (1970) 3 Cal.3d 595. The court 

found a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of rights and no contest plea. It found 

defendant guilty based on his plea, and dismissed the remaining counts and struck the 

section 667.5, subdivision (b) allegations on motion of the prosecutor, reserving to the 

People the right to comment thereon. 

 

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

2 Only case No. F13903231 is included in the notice of appeal. Accordingly, we do 

not further discuss No. F13902897. 
3. 

 On June 17, 2013, defendant was sentenced to a concurrent upper term of three 

years, with the upper term being imposed due to defendant’s prior conviction. Defendant 

was ordered to pay a $980 restitution fine pursuant to section 1202.4, a $40 court 

operation assessment fee pursuant to section 1465.8, and a $30 criminal conviction 

assessment fee pursuant to Government Code section 70373.3 He was found not to have 

the present ability to pay for the services of appointed counsel, and was ordered to 

provide a DNA sample pursuant to section 296. Defendant was awarded total time 

credits of 137 days. He filed a timely notice of appeal, and his request for a certificate of 

probable cause was granted. 

FACTS4

 At approximately 11:50 p.m. on April 9, 2013, patrol officers initiated a traffic 

stop on a vehicle in which defendant was the passenger. Officers discovered defendant 

was in possession of a switchblade knife. After defendant was handcuffed, officers 

discovered a semiautomatic firearm, its serial numbers destroyed, tucked inside the front 

of defendant’s beltline. They located four live rounds of ammunition in his jacket pocket, 

and a small baggie of methamphetamine in his pants pocket. Defendant was previously 

convicted of a felony in 2005 and 2011, both in Fresno County Superior Court. 

APPELLATE COURT REVIEW

 Defendant’s appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief that 

summarizes the pertinent facts, raises no issues, and requests this court to review the 

record independently. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) The opening brief also 

includes the declaration of appellate counsel stating defendant was advised he could file 

 

3 A restitution fine of $980 was also imposed pursuant to section 1202.45, but was 

suspended pending revocation of parole. 

4 The circumstances of the offense are derived from the probation officer’s report. 
4. 

his own brief with this court. By letter dated October 21, 2013, we invited defendant to 

submit additional briefing. To date, he has not done so. 

 After independent review of the record, we conclude there are no reasonably 

arguable legal or factual issues.5

DISPOSITION

 The judgment is affirmed. 

 

5 In his request for a certificate of probable cause, defendant claimed he was 

improperly excluded from “AB-109,” which we interpret to mean sentencing pursuant to 

subdivision (h) of section 1170. Although defendant correctly noted he himself was not 

excluded from such sentencing (see § 1170, subd. (h)(3)), section 29800, 

subdivision (a)(1), the statute he was convicted of violating, requires commitment to state 

prison. 

 Defendant also asserted count 4, a purported violation of Health and Safety Code 

section 11378, was dismissed but was still used, improperly, as a principal or subordinate 

term. The record does not support this claim.