Filed 9/22/26 P. v. Osborn 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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
(Tehama)
THE PEOPLE, C104279
Plaintiff and Respondent,
(Super. Ct. No. 25CR000638)
v.
TYLER DEAN OSBORN,
Defendant and Appellant.
Appointed counsel for defendant Tyler Dean Osborn asks this court to review the
record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende
(1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant has not filed a supplemental brief. Finding no
arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to him, we affirm.
Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In 2025, defendant approached two boys in their early teens and invited them to
“hang out.” While they were doing so, defendant pulled out a pistol and threatened to kill
them unless they dropped their belongings. Defendant then fired four shots into the air
and warned he would kill them if they told anyone. Defendant took their belongings, and
the victims flagged down a police officer after escaping. Law enforcement located
defendant nearby and arrested him.
1
The People charged defendant with second degree robbery (§ 211; count 1);
criminal threats (§ 422, subd. (a); counts 2 and 3); dissuading a witness from reporting a
crime (§ 136.1, subd. (b)(1); counts 4 and 5); and possession of a firearm with the
identification numbers removed (§ 23920; count 6).
Defendant pled guilty to second degree robbery and one count of making criminal
threats (counts 1 and 3). The remaining counts were dismissed. The trial court sentenced
defendant to three years in prison for second degree robbery and eight months
consecutive (one-third the middle term) for criminal threats. The trial awarded 104 days
of actual credit and 15 days of conduct credit. The court imposed without objection a
$900 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)); a suspended $900 parole revocation fine
(§ 1202.45); a $39 theft fine (§ 1202.5, subd. (a)); an $80 court operations assessment
(§ 1465.8); and a $60 conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373).
Defendant timely appeals.
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.) Defendant was advised by
counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the filing of the opening
brief. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from
defendant. We have undertaken an examination of the record and conclude there is no
arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to him.
2
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
/s/
MESIWALA, J.
We concur:
/s/
RENNER, Acting P. J.
/s/
WISEMAN, J.*
* Retired Associate Justice of the Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District, assigned by
the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
3