Court Opinion

ID: 9881944
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-04 19:18:13.529098+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:27.376285
License: Public Domain

Filed 10/4/23 P. v. Micheletti CA1/2

                  NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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). This opinion has not been certified for publication or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

                                      FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

                                                   DIVISION TWO

 THE PEOPLE,
           Plaintiff and Respondent,
                                                                         A167826
 v.
 ROBERT IVAN MICHELETTI,                                                 (Napa County
                                                                         Super. Ct. No. 22CR000012)
           Defendant and Appellant.

         Defendant Robert Micheletti pleaded no contest to felony vandalism
and, pursuant to his plea agreement, the court sentenced him to 32 months
in state prison. Micheletti filed a notice of appeal challenging the validity of
his plea and his sentence. His appointed appellate counsel filed a brief
asking this court to independently review the record under People v. Wende
(1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Micheletti was informed of his right to file a
supplemental brief, but has not filed one. We have independently reviewed
the record in accordance with our Wende obligations and find no arguable
error that would result in a disposition more favorable to Micheletti. We
affirm.

                                                               1
                                BACKGROUND
      On January 6, 2022, Napa County prosecutors charged Micheletti by
complaint with felony vandalism over $400 (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (b)(1)),1
misdemeanor commercial burglary (§ 459.6), misdemeanor possession of
burglary tools (§ 466), misdemeanor receiving stolen property (§ 496,
subd. (a)), and misdemeanor possession of a smoking device (Health & Saf.
Code, § 11364, subd. (a)). According to the probation report, Micheletti used
a crowbar to pry open a jewelry case inside a Walmart store, causing over
$1,000 in estimated damage to two locks. The complaint also alleged that
Micheletti had suffered two prior serious or violent felony convictions for
burglary (§ 459) in San Mateo County in 1985 and 1992, respectively, which
qualify as strikes (§ 667, subd. (d)).
      On or about October 21, 2022, Micheletti was sentenced to four years in
state prison on a different burglary case from Alameda County.
      At the March 24, 2023 hearing in this case, as part of a negotiated
disposition, Micheletti pleaded no contest to felony vandalism and admitted
one of the two prior strikes (the 1992 burglary). The court dismissed the
remaining counts. Consistent with the plea agreement, the trial court
sentenced Micheletti to 32 months in state prison (a low term of 16 months,
doubled due to the strikes), to run concurrently with his Alameda County
sentence. The court calculated eight days of total time credits: four credits
for actual days served and four conduct credits. The court ordered victim
restitution in an amount to be determined. It also imposed a $300 restitution
fine and suspended the $300 parole revocation fine.

      1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

                                         2
      The March 30, 2023 abstract of judgment reflected the court’s oral
pronouncement described above, along with an additional $40 court
operations assessment and $30 conviction assessment.
      On May 5, 2023, Micheletti filed a notice of appeal challenging the
validity of his plea and his sentence. He requested a certificate of probable
cause, explaining his belief that “he was misadvised as to the number of pre-
sentence credits he would be entitled to where the sentence in this case was
imposed concurrently to an Alameda County case for which he was already
serving prison sentence at the time of his plea and sentencing in this case.”
The trial court granted the request for a certificate of probable cause.
      On May 12, 2023, Micheletti sent a handwritten letter to the trial court
asserting that it had “come to [his] attention that the ‘credit part of the plea
[bargain] has been done wrong.’ ” He specified that “the plea/sentence is
correct,” but “the credit has been left out.” Micheletti asserted that he had
been “doing time” on the instant case from January 7, 2022, to March 24,
2023, and so was entitled to 892 days of total time credits: 446 actual and
446 conduct.
      On July 5, 2023, Micheletti’s appointed appellate counsel filed a letter
with the trial court pursuant to People v. Fares (1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 954.
(See id. at p. 960 [“We therefore urge counsel presented with apparent error
in the calculation of presentence custody credits to attempt correction in the
trial court before elevating the issue to the stature of formal appeal”].)
Counsel asked the trial court to correct the March 30, 2023 abstract of
judgment to (1) reflect nine (rather than eight) days of total time credits, as
Micheletti was not given any custody credit for the one day served at Napa
County jail when he was arrested on October 30, 2021; (2) stay the $300
restitution fine given Micheletti’s inability to pay based on length of

                                        3
incarceration and illness; and (3) strike the $40 court operations assessment
and $30 conviction assessment. The court issued an amended abstract of
judgment with each of those corrections on August 11, 2023.
                                 DISCUSSION
      We have reviewed the record on appeal for any arguable issues.
Counsel represented Micheletti at the March 24, 2023 hearing. Before
entering his no contest plea, the court advised Micheletti of his rights. The
court found Micheletti had knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived
his rights and his plea was voluntary. The 32-month prison sentence
imposed appears to be authorized by law, and complied with the plea
agreement. (See §§ 594, subd. (b)(1) [vandalism above $400 punishable by
imprisonment pursuant to 1170, subd. (h)]; 1170, subd. (h)(1) [sentencing
triad of 16 months, two years, or three years]; 667, subd. (e)(1) [doubling term
for strike].) The trial court amended the abstract of judgment to correct the
total time credits to nine days, stay the restitution fine, and strike the court
operations and conviction assessments.
      Micheletti’s letter seeking 892 days of total time credits appears to
have been based on the misperception that since his sentence in this case was
to be served concurrently with the earlier Alameda County burglary, he must
receive credit in this case going back to his time in presentence custody for
the Alameda County burglary, over a year before he agreed to plead no
contest in this case. The trial court agreed with Micheletti’s counsel that one
day should be added to his total credits, but not with Micheletti’s assertion
that he should get credit for 892 days more, since the court amended the
abstract of judgment accordingly.

                                        4
     Having examined the entire record, we find no arguable error that
would result in a disposition more favorable to Micheletti within the meaning
of Wende.
                              DISPOSITION
     The judgment is affirmed.

                                      5
                                         _________________________
                                         Markman, J.*

We concur:

_________________________
Richman, Acting P.J.

_________________________
Miller, J.

People v. Micheletti (A167826)

     * Judge of the Alameda Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice
pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

                                     6