Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County Nos. INF053806 & INF055318, Thomas N. Douglass, Jr., Judge.
Lewis A. Wenzell, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
McKinster, J.
Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, defendant’s counsel asks us to examine the record to determine if there are any issues deserving further briefing. We find no issues deserving further briefing and affirm the judgments.
We note that the record does not contain any information concerning how the offenses in this case occurred. Accordingly, we present only the procedural facts.
Defendant’s appeal involves two cases: (1) INF053806 (first case); and (2) INF055318 (second case). Defendant was granted a certificate of probable cause for both cases. In the first case, pursuant to a plea bargain, on April 18, 2006, defendant pled guilty to vandalizing property on or about January 29, 2006 (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (a)), and unlawful driving or taking of vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)) on or about February 8, 2006. As to the vehicle crime, defendant admitted committing the offense to benefit a criminal street gang. (Pen. Code, § 186.22, subd. (b).) Pursuant to the plea bargain, the court sentenced defendant to county jail for a term of 180 days and granted defendant five years’ probation.
The issues raised on appeal are not limited by the certificate of probable cause. (People v. Hoffard (1995) 10 Cal.4th 1170, 1176-1177, 1179.)
In the second case, pursuant to a plea bargain, on June 15, 2007, defendant pled guilty to vandalizing property on or about August 8, 2006. (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (a).) Defendant admitted suffering a prior strike conviction, as a result of the vehicle crime in the first case. (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (c) & (e)(1), 1170.12, subd. (c)(1).) Pursuant to the plea bargain, the court sentenced defendant to state prison for a term of six years.
After pleading guilty to the charge in the second case, defendant admitted being in violation of the terms of his probation in the first case. The court revoked defendant’s probation and sentenced defendant to state prison for a term of six years to be served concurrently with his sentence in the second case.
DISCUSSION
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. After examining the record, counsel filed a brief raising no arguable issues and a request for an independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436. This court notified defendant on March 7, 2008, that he had 30 days within which to submit, by supplemental brief, any grounds for appeal. To date, we have received no response from defendant. We have independently examined the entire record and have determined that no arguable issues exist. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 113-119; People v. Wende, supra,25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)
DISPOSITION
The judgments are affirmed.
We concur: Hollenhorst, Acting P.J., Richli, J.