Filed 10/27/26 P. v Salinas CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
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has not been certified for publication or or dered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
THE PEOPLE,
F090811
Plaintiff and Respondent,
(Super. Ct. No. F25902710)
v.
MICHAEL DANIEL SALINAS, OPINION
Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Stephanie L.
Negin, Judge.
Julia J. Spikes, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and
Respondent.
-ooOoo-
* Before Franson, Acting P. J., Meehan, J. and Sandhu, J.
INTRODUCTION
Appellant and defendant Michael Daniel Salinas (defendant) pleaded guilty to
shoplifting with prior theft offenses, and was sentenced to the indicated sentence of
32 months in prison.
On appeal, defendant’s counsel filed a brief that summarized the facts with
citations to the record, raised no issues, and asked this court to independently review the
record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant has not filed a supplemental
brief. We affirm.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On April 29, 2025, a complaint was filed in the Fresno County Superior Court that
charged defendant with one count of shoplifting with seven prior theft convictions, and
alleged that on or about April 27, 2025, he entered a Walmart, a commercial
establishment, with the intent to commit larceny while the establishment was open during
regular business hours, and the value of property taken or intended to be taken did not
exceed $950. (Pen. Code,1 § 666.1, subds. (a)(1), (b).) It was further alleged he had
two prior strike convictions, and there were two aggravating factors, that he served a
prior prison term and he was on supervision when he committed the offense. (Cal. Rules
of Court, rule 4.421(b)(3) & (b)(4); §§ 667, subds. (b)–(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)–(d).)
Defendant pleaded not guilty.
On August 15, 2025, after the defense vacated the preliminary hearing, defendant
pleaded no contest to the charged offense and admitted the prior strike convictions, for an
indicated sentence of 32 months in prison.
On October 31, 2025, the trial court denied defendant’s request to dismiss the
prior strike convictions, and sentenced defendant to the indicated lower term of
16 months doubled to 32 months in prison.
1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
2.
On November 26, 2025, defendant filed a timely notice of appeal; he did not
request a certificate of probable cause.
DISCUSSION
As noted above, defendant’s counsel filed a Wende brief with this court. The brief
also included counsel’s declaration indicating that defendant was advised he could file his
own brief with this court. By letter on July 20, 2026, we invited defendant to submit
additional briefing. To date, he has not done so.
After independent review of the record, we find that no other reasonably arguable
factual or legal issues exist.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
3.