People v. Harlow CA3

Filed 12/19/13 P. v. Harlow CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Yuba) ----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, C073663

v. (Super. Ct. No. CRF12404)

FRANK JARED HARLOW,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Frank Jared Harlow asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment. We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.) Because the matter was resolved by plea, the facts are taken from the stipulated factual basis that includes the police report, as summarized in the probation report. In July 2012, defendant and Tina Prewitt went to a Save-Mart store where they put alcohol, deodorant, batteries, and other items with a total value of $274.03 in a shopping cart.

1

They bagged the items and walked out of the store without paying. A loss prevention officer stopped them and they admitted they planned to sell the merchandise. Defendant admitted to stealing to support his drug addiction. On November 14, 2012, defendant pled no contest to second degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459),1 with a two-year state prison cap. Sentencing was deferred to permit defendant to enter a residential drug treatment program and qualify for probation eligibility. Defendant did not appear for his intake appointment and the trial court sentenced him on April 2, 2013. The trial court sentenced defendant to serve the midterm of two years, awarded defendant 349 days of presentence custody credit, and ordered him to pay various fines and fees including a $240 restitution fund fine (§ 1202.4), a $40 court security fee (§ 1465.8, subd. (a)(1)), and a $30 conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373). Defendant did not obtain a certificate of probable cause. We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.)2 Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within