People v. Bruce

Full title: THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DARLA GAY BRUCE, Defendant and…

Court: COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sutter)

Date published: Sep 26, 2016

C081549 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 26, 2016)

Opinion

C081549

09-26-2016

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DARLA GAY BRUCE, Defendant and Appellant.

RAYE, P. J.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. CRF160169)

Appointed counsel for defendant Darla Gay Bruce has asked this court to review the record to determine whether any arguable issues exist on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we will affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND

We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the underlying case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)

Defendant approached the victim and asked for a dollar. The victim said she did not have a dollar. Defendant then called her a "bitch" and threatened to "kick her ass." When the victim tried to make a call on her cell phone, defendant yelled: "You better not be calling the police!" Defendant then kicked the victim's "back leg," hit her on the back of her head, and took her cell phone from her hand. Defendant was later found with the victim's cell phone in her purse.

In exchange for a stipulated sentence, defendant pleaded no contest to second degree robbery. (Pen. Code, § 211.) The trial court imposed the agreed upon two-year term. The court awarded 32 days of credit (28 actual days and 4 conduct days). (Pen. Code, § 2933.1.) The court also imposed various fines and fees.

Counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and requesting this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Counsel advised defendant of her 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 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 more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

RAYE, P. J. We concur: MURRAY, J. RENNER, J.