P. v.
Reyes



















Filed 6/18/13 P. v. Reyes 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NOT TO
BE PUBLISHED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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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, v. JOSEPH JAMES REYES, Defendant and Appellant.

C070866 (Super. Ct. No. CRF11183)

Appointed counsel for defendant
Joseph James Reyes 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.)

On March 26,
2011,
a cab driver was dispatched to a location where he picked up defendant and
Jacob Montoya. Montoya gave the driver
an address and directions. Defendant
asked the driver if he knew about the Norteño gang. When the driver pulled over as instructed,
defendant put his arm around the driver’s throat and Montoya put a semi-automatic
pistol in the driver’s ribs, demanding his money and his cab identification
card. The driver gave $83 and his card
to Montoya, who threatened to do physical harm to the driver if he called the
police. The two robbers fled.

Defendant entered a plea of no
contest to making criminal threats
(Pen. Code, § 422; count 2) with use of a firearm (Pen. Code,
§ 12022.5, subd. (a)) and participation in a criminal street gang (Pen.
Code, § 186.22, subd. (a); count 3) in exchange for dismissal of the
remaining counts and a stipulated state prison sentence of 12 years. The court sentenced defendant
accordingly.

Defendant appeals. He did not seek a href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.com/">certificate of probable cause (Pen.
Code, § 1237.5).

We appointed href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">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.) Defendant was
advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of
the date of filing of 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.





HOCH , J.





We concur:





NICHOLSON , Acting P. J.





MURRAY , J.