People v. Mitchell

Good Law
129 Cal. Rptr. 3d 361·197 Cal. App. 4th 1009·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 960
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 26, 2011No. C061560California2,655 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Nicholson, J.

Defendant Antonio Dwayne Mitchell entered into a plea bargain and pleaded guilty to six of the 24 counts charged against him in return for a specific sentence. He appeals because part of the sentence to which he agreed is based on an enhancement with which he was never charged and which he did not admit committing. He asks us to reverse the judgment and allow him to withdraw his plea.

The Attorney General asserts defendant waived his right of appeal as part of his plea bargain. The Attorney General also contends defendant is estopped from challenging the trial court’s action because he benefited from the plea bargain.

We agree with defendant, and although we do not reverse the judgment, we modify the judgment by reducing his sentence and otherwise affirm. His purported waiver of his right to appeal was not knowing, intelligent, or voluntary. He also is not estopped from challenging the sentence, as he was sentenced for an enhancement which he did not commit, was not alleged against him, and to which he did not admit.

*1012 PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In July 2007, an information charged defendant with 24 criminal counts committed between November 4, 2006, and March 13,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.