People v. Miller CA2/4

Filed 9/17/26 P. v. Miller CA2/4

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR THE PEOPLE, B350426

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. BA502421) v.

JAMES MILLER,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, David R. Fields, Judge. Affirmed.

Richard B. Lennon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Defendant James Miller was charged by information with forcible oral copulation (former Pen. Code,1 § 288a, subd. (c)(2); count 2); sodomy by use of force (§ 286, subd. (c)(2); count 3); and kidnapping to commit sex crimes (§ 209, subd. (b)(1); count 4). Before and after the preliminary hearing, Miller moved to dismiss the case due to precharging delay by the prosecution. The trial court denied his motions.

Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, the information was amended to add a count for forcible rape (§ 261, subd. (a)(2); count 5). Miller pled no contest to the forcible rape and forcible oral copulation charges. Miller also admitted an aggravating factor under California Rules of Court, rule 4.421(a)(2) (defendant used a weapon at the time of the commission of the crime).

The trial court sentenced Miller in accordance with the plea agreement to the upper term of eight years on count 5 and the middle term of six years on count 2. The sentences were to run consecutively pursuant to section 667.6, subdivisions (c) and (e).

Miller appealed and requested but was denied a certificate of probable cause. This court issued an order limiting the appeal to issues that do not require a certificate of probable cause. (See § 1237.5; see also Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b).)

Miller’s appointed counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues, noting this “appeal lies for any sentencing errors that would not violate the plea agreement,” and asking this court to independently review the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. We directed counsel to send the record and a copy of the opening brief to Miller and notified Miller of his right to respond within 30 days. We received no response.

We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that no arguable issues exist and that Miller’s appellate attorney has complied with the responsibilities of counsel. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 278; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 119.)

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

MORI, Acting P. J. We concur:

TAMZARIAN, J.

DAUM, J.