IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento)
March 29, 2011
THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
STEVEN ADAM GOMES, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
(Super. Ct. No. 07F10020)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Robi , Acting P. J.
P. v. Gomes 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
On October 22, 2007, defendant Steven Adam Gomes, armed with a firearm, and three cohorts, two of whom were also armed, entered an inhabited residence, tied up the people inside, and stole property. Defendant admitted that he committed the offense and used a gun.
Defendant pled no contest to robbery and admitted an in-concert allegation and a personal use of a firearm allegation (a nine-millimeter handgun) in exchange for dismissal of the remaining counts and allegations with a waiver pursuant to People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754 and a stipulated 13-year state prison sentence. The trial court sentenced defendant accordingly.
We appointed 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. (People v. Wende (1979) 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.
The judgment is affirmed.*fn1
We concur: BUT ,J. DUARTE ,J.