Filed 3/24/15 P. v. Sanders CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. STEPHEN CHARLES SANDERS, Defendant and Appellant. D064744

(Super. Ct. No. SCD204952)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Robert F. O'Neill, Judge. Affirmed.

Russell S. Babcock, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. In February 2009, Stephe n Charles Sanders entered a negotiated guilty plea to possessing an illegal weapon (P en. Code, former § 12020, subd. (a)(1); all further statutory references are to the Penal Code). In October 2012, the court denied his motion2 to withdraw his plea. In June 2013, Sander s entered a negotiated guilty plea in case No. SCD235740 (Court of Appeal No. D064743); that plea bargain provided, as to that case,

the instant case and three other cases, for a stipulated 25-year sentence and waiver of the right to appeal. (We grant Sanders's request fo r judicial notice of the record in Court of Appeal No. D064743.) In September, the cour t sentenced Sanders to 25 years in prison, including a consecutive eight-month term (one th ird the middle term) in the instant case. Sanders appeals. We affirm.

BACKGROUND In January 2007, Sanders possessed sap gloves, knowing they were a weapon.

DISCUSSION Appointed appellate counsel has f iled a brief summarizing the facts and proceedings below. Counsel presents no argu ment for reversal, but asks this court to

review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 ( Wende ). Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 ( Anders ), counsel lists, as a possible, but not arguable, issue, whether the waiver of appellate rights was knowing, intelligent and voluntary. We granted Sanders permission to file a brief on his own behal f. He has done so and raises contentions concerning searches, the plea bargain, the denial of his plea withdrawal motion and sentencing. "A guilty plea admits ever y element of the offense ch arged and is a conclusive admission of guilt." ( People v. Maultsby (2012) 53 Cal.4th 296, 302.) The absence of a certificate of probable cause pr events Sanders from challenging the validity of his guilty3 plea. (§ 1237.5; People v. Mendez (1999) 19 Cal.4th 1084, 1095.) Furthermore, as part of his plea, Sanders waived his right to app eal issues relating to any suppression motions and any stipulated sentence and also waived his right to appeal. Then, in June 2013, Sanders waived his right to ap peal in the instant case, and the record show s the waiver was knowing, intelligen t and voluntary. A review of the record pursuant to Wende and Anders , including the possible issue listed pursuant to Anders , has disclosed no reasonably argua ble appellate issue. Sanders has been competently represente d by counsel on this appeal.

DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.

M C INTYRE, J.

WE CONCUR:

NARES, Acting P. J.

AARON, J.