People v. Duyon CA2/6

Filed 3/9/26 P. v. Duyon CA2/6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B347299 (Super. Ct. No. 2024033607) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Ventura County)

v.

JAMES DUYON,

Defendant and Appellant.

James Duyon appeals from the judgment after pleading guilty to one count of attempted robbery. (Pen. Code, §§ 664 / 211.) The court suspended imposition of sentence and placed appellant on probation subject to various terms and conditions, with credits for time served in county jail. Appellant asked the owner of a donut shop if he could use a phone. The owner handed him the business cell phone to use. When appellant started to walk away, the owner started after him. Appellant told the owner not to approach because he had a

knife. Appellant also threw soda crates at the owner. A passerby who witnessed the incident had appellant hand him the phone, which he then returned to the owner. Appellant was charged with attempted robbery. (Pen. Code, §§ 664/ 211.) He initially filed for mental health diversion, which the prosecution opposed on the basis appellant, though eligible, was unsuitable. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36.) Appellant subsequently did not pursue the diversion request but instead waived his preliminary hearing and trial rights and pled guilty to the charge. We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. After counsel examined the record, he filed an opening brief raising no arguable issues. On December 9, 2025, we advised appellant by mail that he had 30 days within which to file a supplemental brief to raise any issues he wished us to consider. We have not received a response. We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441-443.) The judgment is affirmed. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.