People v. Morgan CA4/1

DISCUSSION

Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief summarizing the facts and

proceedings below. Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks this court to

review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.

Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel mentions as a possible but

not arguable issue "[w]hether the trial court erred by doubling the base term of

[Morgan]'s sentence based on the strike conviction because [Morgan] never admitted the

truth of that allegation when he pled guilty . . . ."

We granted Morgan permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has done so,

contending his 16-month sentence was doubled to 32 months as a result of the strike

although he did not admit the strike when he entered his guilty plea. Morgan's contention

is not well taken.

Morgan's contention is a challenge to the validity of his guilty plea. Because the

trial court denied his request for a certificate of probable cause, Morgan cannot challenge

the validity of his plea. (§ 1237.5; People v. Mendez (1999) 19 Cal.4th 1084, 1095;

People v. Williams (1980) 103 Cal.App.3d 507, 511-512.) Moreover,…