People v. Parks

Full title: THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. TENCIA SHYANE PARKS, Defendant…

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

Date published: Jun 8, 2021

No. C091866 (Cal. Ct. App. Jun. 8, 2021)

Opinion

C091866

06-08-2021

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. TENCIA SHYANE PARKS, Defendant and Appellant.

Duarte, J.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Super. Ct. No. CR037258

Duarte, J.

Appointed counsel for defendant Tencia Shyane Parks has asked this court to conduct an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable error in defendant's favor, we affirm.

BACKGROUND

Defendant entered the victim's house by claiming to have an interest in renting a property owned by the victim. After the victim went to the restroom, defendant took the victim's purse and left.

Defendant was charged with three counts: first degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459, count I), ¹ with accompanying allegations for an occupied residence (§ 667.5, subd. (c)) and an elderly occupant present (§ 667.9, subd. (a)), theft from an elder (§ 368, subd. (d), count II), and misdemeanor petty theft (§ 484, subd. (a), count III).

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

Defendant pleaded guilty to first degree burglary (count I) with the stipulations she not be sentenced to more than two years in prison and that she was potentially eligible for probation. The trial court accepted her plea and the remaining charges and enhancements were dismissed.

On March 30, 2020, the trial court denied probation and sentenced defendant to the low term of two years in prison for burglary. The court also imposed a $300 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)) and a stayed $300 parole revocation restitution fine (§ 1202.45).

Defendant appealed and did not obtain a certificate of probable cause.

DISCUSSION

Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts and procedural history 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 her right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days from the date the opening brief was filed. More than 30 days have elapsed, and defendant has not filed a supplemental brief. Our review of the record pursuant to Wende has disclosed no arguable errors in defendant's favor.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: Robie, Acting P. J., Murray, J.