People v. Wells CA3

Filed 1/12/24 P. v. Wells CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (El Dorado) ----

THE PEOPLE, C098475

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 23CR0043)

v.

MICHAEL DAVID WELLS,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Michael David Wells asked this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We will affirm.

1

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On January 24, 2023, an information was filed charging Wells with second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211; count 1)1 and misdemeanor battery (§ 242; count 2). As to count 1, multiple aggravating factors were alleged. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421(b)(1), (2), (3)  (5).) In February 2023, Wells pled no contest to count 1 and admitted three aggravating factors. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.21(b)(2), (3)  (5).) The remaining allegations were dismissed with a waiver pursuant to People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754. That same day, the trial court sentenced Wells to state prison for three years, as agreed to by the parties. The trial court awarded Wells 59 days of custody credit. The court imposed a $300 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)), a corresponding $300 parole revocation fine (suspended unless parole is revoked) (§ 1202.45), a $40 court operations fee (§ 1465.8, subd. (a)(1)), and a $30 criminal conviction assessment fee (Gov. Code, § 70373). Wells did not obtain a certificate of probable cause on appeal. DISCUSSION Appointed counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and asking this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Wells was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from Wells. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to Wells.