Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Super. Ct. No. CM027047
DAVIS, J.
Defendant John William Payne took a watch and various clothing items from a Mervyn’s department store without paying for them.
Defendant pleaded no contest to petty theft with a prior (Pen. Code, § 666) and admitted serving a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)) in exchange for dismissal of the remaining charges and enhancements with a Harvey waiver.
Hereafter, undesignated section references are to the Penal Code.
People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754.
The trial court sentenced defendant to an aggregate term of four years in state prison, consisting of the upper term of three years for the petty theft with a prior, plus one additional year for the prior prison term. In deciding to impose the upper term, the court cited the following circumstances in aggravation: “[T]he crime was premeditated, . . . defendant’s priors are numerous, . . . defendant has served prior prison terms, and . . . defendant’s prior performance on probation or parole was unsatisfactory.” The court found no factors in mitigation. The court imposed a $200 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)), a $200 parole revocation fine (§ 1202.45), and a $36 theft fine (§ 1202.5); ordered defendant to pay victim restitution to Mervyn’s and/or the State Board of Control and reserved jurisdiction to set or modify the amount; ordered defendant pay a $20 court security fee (§ 1465.8) and provide samples (§ 296, subd. (a)(1)); and recommended that defendant attend drug and alcohol counseling while in prison (§ 1203.096). The court determined that defendant was not entitled to any presentence custody credit. (People v. Bruner (1995) 9 Cal.4th 1178, 1180, 1191, 1195.)
According to the probation report, defendant “was absconding from parole supervision when he committed the instant offense, and a ‘Parolee at Large’ (PAL) warrant had been issued for his arrest. At the time of his arrest for the instant offense, a parole hold, pursuant to § 3056 . . ., was placed on his custody status, based on the new offense, as well as his failure to report to his parole agent as ordered (absconding).”
Defendant appeals. He did not obtain a certificate of probable cause. (§ 1237.5.)
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 have elapsed, and we have 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.