Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Super. Ct. No. 07F06639
NICHOLSON, J.
About 4:00 p.m. on July 8, 2007, defendant Ricardo Don Barkins approached a 51-year-old woman and grabbed her purse as she got into her parked car. She resisted, pulling her purse free from his grasp. Defendant got into a car that drove away. About a half an hour later, defendant approached a 16-year-old girl near a shopping mall, successfully stole her purse, and got into the backseat of a car that drove away.
Defendant entered a negotiated plea of no contest to attempted second degree robbery (Pen. Code, §§ 664/211; undesignated section references are to this code) and second degree robbery (§ 211) and admitted a strike prior [a 1992 conviction for violating section 211] (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12), in exchange for a stipulated state prison sentence of 10 years. The court sentenced defendant accordingly, that is, the upper term of five years, doubled for the strike prior, for the robbery, and a concurrent midterm of two years, doubled for the strike prior, for the attempted robbery. The court awarded presentence custody credits of 491 days and ordered defendant to pay a $200 restitution fine, a $200 corresponding parole fine, a $242.28 main jail booking fee, a $27,22 classification fee, $40 in court security fees, $120 in restitution to one victim, and restitution in an amount to be determined to the other victim.
Defendant appeals. His request for a certificate of probable cause (§ 1237.5) was denied.
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.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: SIMS, Acting P. J., CANTIL-SAKAUYE, J.