>P. v. West























Filed 12/17/12 P. v. West 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NOT
TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for
purposes of rule 8.1115.







IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT




>

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ROBERT ALLEN WEST, Defendant and Appellant.

F064183 (Super. Ct. No. BF136303A) >OPINION

>THE COURThref="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" title="">^*

APPEAL
from a judgment of the Superior Court of href="http://www.adrservices.org/neutrals/frederick-mandabach.php">Kern County. Michael G. Bush, Judge.

Deborah
Prucha, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Office
of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and
Respondent.

>

>-ooOoo-

On August 23, 2011, appellant, Robert Allen West, pled no
contest to the offense commonly known as petty
theft with a prior (Pen. Code, § 666)href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" title="">^[1] and admitted enhancement allegations that he
had served three separate prison terms for prior felony convictions. He entered his plea with the understanding
that he would receive a sentence of four years, with two years to be served in
custody and two years on mandatory supervision (§ 1170, subd. (h)(5)(B)). On October 25, 2011, the court struck one of
appellant’s prior prison term enhancements and imposed the agreed upon
four-year term as a split sentence, with two years to be served in Kern County
Jail and the remaining two years on mandatory supervision.

Insofar as
the record reveals, appellant did not request, and the court did not issue, a href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">certificate of probable cause.

Appellant’s appointed appellate counsel has filed an href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.com/">opening brief which summarizes the
pertinent facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks that
this court independently review the record.
(People v. Wende (1979) 25
Cal.3d. 436.) Appellant has not
responded to this court’s invitation to submit additional briefing.>

FACTShref="#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3" title="">^[2]>

On March 14, 2011, a Kern County Sheriff’s
deputy, responding to a report of a theft in progress, made contact, initially,
with Roy Thomas and Bobby Crocker.
Thomas told the deputy the following:
Upon hearing a “loud banging noise outside,” he went outside his
residence and saw a vehicle leaving at a high rate of speed. Crocker told Thomas someone had stolen his
generator. Thomas got in his vehicle
and, following an “oil trail,” drove to a residence where he saw
appellant. Appellant “unchain[ed] the
generator from a vehicle,” got in the vehicle and “start[ed] to drive out of
the driveway, at which point Thomas, with his vehicle, blocked appellant from
driving out of the driveway.

The deputy then made contact with
appellant, who stated that someone had stolen his vehicle “minutes ago” and had
returned it “with a generator attached to a chain on the rear of his
vehicle.”

Appellant suffered convictions of href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">second degree burglary (§§ 459, 460,
subd. (b)) in 1994 and grand theft (§ 487, subd. (a)) in 2000. In 2004, he suffered a conviction of either
grand theft, in violation of section 487, subdivision (a) or grand theft from a
person (§ 487, subd. (c)).href="#_ftn4"
name="_ftnref4" title="">^[3]
Appellant served a separate prison term for each of these
convictions.

DISCUSSION

Following
independent review of the record, we have concluded that no reasonably href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.com/">arguable legal or factual issues exist.

DISPOSITION

The
judgment is affirmed.