Opinion
B311693
03-11-2022
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ROBERT L. SANFORD, Defendant and Appellant.
Richard Lennon and Lisa Ferreira, under appointments by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. BA248066 Deborah Brazil, Judge. Dismissed.
Richard Lennon and Lisa Ferreira, under appointments by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.
BAKER, J.
Defendant Robert Sanford (defendant) was convicted of a single count of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) in 2004. The trial court found true allegations that defendant sustained four prior serious felony convictions (§ 667(a)(1)), served three prior prison terms (§ 667.5(b)), and sustained four prior felony convictions within the meaning of the Three Strikes law (§§ 667(b)-(i), 1170.12). The trial court struck three of defendant's prior strike convictions in the interest of justice pursuant to section 1385 and sentenced defendant to serve 30 years in prison.
Undesignated statutory references that follow are to the Penal Code.
In February 2021, defendant filed what he styled as a motion to correct an unauthorized sentence. The motion argued he should be accruing conduct credits during his time in custody at a 50 percent rate. The trial court denied the motion on March 1, 2021, finding it was without legal basis.
Defendant noticed an appeal from the trial court's March 1, 2021, order. After examining the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues. On September 10, 2021, this court sent defendant a notice advising he had 30 days to personally submit a supplemental brief or letter with contentions or issues he wanted this court to consider. The court received no response.
We have examined the appellate record, although such an examination is not required (People v. Cole (2020) 52 Cal.App.5th 1023, 1039-1040, review granted Oct. 14, 2020, S264278), and we are satisfied no arguable issue exists (§ 2933.1).
DISPOSITION
The appeal is dismissed as abandoned.
We concur: RUBIN, P. J., KIM, J.