Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Super. Ct. No. 05F8190
CANTIL-SAKAUYE, J.
This is an appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. In 2005, defendant Kenneth Dino Carmony pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine and public intoxication. Imposition of sentence was suspended and defendant was placed on probation. Thereafter, multiple violations of probation commenced.
In August 2007, two petitions alleging violations of probation were filed, both alleging defendant had been publicly intoxicated. Defendant admitted both violations. Probation was revoked and reinstated.
In November and December 2007, two more probation violation petitions were filed alleging defendant had been publicly intoxicated. Defendant admitted both violations.
In April 2008, defendant admitted he had been publicly intoxicated again in violation of his probation. In May 2008, defendant admitted another probation violation, for two incidents of public intoxication and one incident of resisting arrest. Probation was revoked and reinstated on additional terms and conditions, including a probation extension of two years.
In September 2008, defendant admitted the allegations of four separate probation violation petitions alleging public intoxication, resisting arrest, battery and failure to complete a residential treatment program. Probation was revoked. Defendant was sentenced to three years in prison. Execution of the sentence was suspended and defendant was granted three years of probation.
In December 2008, defendant admitted the allegations of two separate violation of probation petitions. These petitions alleged defendant had used alcohol on three separate occasions, committed a misdemeanor battery and inflicted harm on an elderly person.
In February 2009, following defendant’s statement, the court denied further probation and ordered execution of the previously stayed three-year sentence.
Defendant did not obtain a certificate of probable cause. He now appeals the execution of sentence after his 12th violation of probation.
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 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., RAYE, J.