Opinion
C075873
10-09-2014
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CHARLES DEAN HIPES, JR., Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. CM039935)
This case comes to us pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Having reviewed the record as required by Wende, we affirm the judgment.
We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)
BACKGROUND
Law officers received a report that two sets of keys and a cell phone were stolen from a park bench. Defendant Charles Dean Hipes, Jr., who officers knew had been involved in a number of thefts, was nearby. Officers contacted him, conducted a probation search, and recovered the keys and cell phone. In addition, they found three hypodermic syringes in defendant's pants pockets.
A complaint charged defendant with receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a)), with an additional allegation that defendant had served two prior prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (b)), and possession of an injection/ingestion device (Health & Saf. Code, § 11364.1, subd. (a)(1)).
Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
Defendant pleaded no contest to receiving stolen property, with an agreed maximum sentence of three years. The remaining charges were dismissed. The trial court sentenced defendant to the upper term of three years and ordered defendant to pay a $280 restitution fund fine (§ 1202.4), a $30 conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373), and a $40 court operations assessment (§ 1465.8). The court awarded defendant 141 days of presentence custody credits. The trial court denied defendant's request for a certificate of probable cause.
DISCUSSION
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and, pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, requesting the court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. 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. We have undertaken an examination of the entire record pursuant to Wende, and 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: BLEASE, J. HULL, J.