P. v. Fowler

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed 1/30/14  P. v. Fowler 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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  This opinion has not been
certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

(Placer)

----

 

 

 
>

THE PEOPLE,                           Plaintiff and Respondent,               v.   GARY LEE FOWLER,                           Defendant and Appellant.

C073380   (Super. Ct. No. 62119658)

 

 

 

 

            Appointed
counsel for defendant Gary Lee Fowler 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 will affirm the judgment.

I

            Because
the matters were resolved by plea, the facts are taken from the stated factual
basis contained in the plea. 

            In
late January 2013, defendant stole a Chrysler van from Enterprise Rent-A-Car.  Defendant had also sustained a prior strike
conviction for assault with a deadly weapon or by means of force likely to
produce great bodily injury and had served two prior prison terms. 

            Defendant
pleaded no contest to unlawfully driving or taking a motor vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851,
subd. (a)) and admitted the prior strike allegation (Pen. Code, §§ 1170.12,
subds. (a)-(d); 667, subds. (b)-(i))[1] and the two prior prison term enhancements (§ 667.5, subd.
(b)).  The trial court dismissed the remaining
counts against defendant. 

            The
trial court denied probation and sentenced defendant to the stipulated
aggregate term of six years in state prison, awarded defendant 69 days of
presentence custody credit, and ordered him to pay a $600 restitution fund fine (§ 1202.4), $600
parole revocation fine suspended unless parole is revoked (§ 1202.45), a
$40 court operations fee
(§ 1465.8, subd. (a)(1)), and a $30 court facilities assessment (Gov.
Code, § 70373).  Defendant did not
obtain a certificate of probable cause.

II

            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.  (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.)  Defendant 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 elapsed and we received no
communication from defendant.



 

            Having
undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that
would result in a disposition more
favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

            The
judgment is affirmed.  

 

 

                                                                                                          MAURO                        , J.

 

 

We concur:

 

 

                     NICHOLSON                    , Acting P. J.

 

 

                     ROBIE                               , J.