IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento)
April 19, 2012
THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
ADAM WENDEL COLEMAN, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
(Super. Ct. No. 10F06373)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Robie , J.
P. v. Coleman
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
Defendant's appeal is subject to the principles of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110. In accordance with the latter, we will provide a summary of the offense and the proceedings in the trial court.
In March 2000, defendant was convicted of robbery. In September 2010, while armed with a handgun, defendant Adam Wendel Coleman took personal property from Nicole Rodriguez. The offense was committed in an inhabited dwelling.
Defendant was charged with four counts of first degree robbery, each with an allegation that he committed the offense with a gun, and assault with a deadly weapon with a further allegation that defendant personally used a firearm. It was also alleged defendant had a prior serious felony conviction. He agreed to plead no contest to one robbery charge and admit the firearm enhancement and the strike allegation. In exchange, he would be sentenced to three years for the robbery, doubled because of the strike, plus 10 years for the firearm enhancement. The remaining counts would be dismissed. Defendant was sentenced in accordance with the plea and awarded 144 days of actual credit with an additional 72 days of good time credit for a total of 216 days. Various fines and fees were imposed. Defendant did not obtain a certificate of probable cause.
Defendant appeals. 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, supra,25 Cal.3d at p. 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 have elapsed, and we have received no communication from defendant.
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition that is more favorable to defendant.
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: BLEASE , Acting P. J. DUARTE , J.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.