Opinion
C056522
4-16-2008
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RANDY JAMES SHAW, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
On May 25, 2005, defendant Randy James Shaw entered a Nextel cellular store in Roseville and took $600.04 in cash, one cell phone, and five dummy cell phones. On May 27, 2005, defendant pried open the front door of the Chaat Café in Roseville and took $200 from the cash register and a safe containing approximately $1,900. On September 7, 2005, defendant pried open the door of a Safeway gas station in Roseville and took a can of soda and some cigarettes.
In case No. 62052476, defendant entered a negotiated plea of no contest to three counts of second degree burglary. (Pen. Code, § 459.) The court sentenced defendant to four years four months in state prison, suspended execution of sentence, and placed defendant on probation on the condition he serve 365 days in county jail with credit for 98 days (66 days custody and 32 days conduct credit).
On May 31, 2007, Rocklin Police officers stopped defendants car. It contained a safe that had just been stolen from a Rocklin business.
In case No. 62070888, defendant entered a negotiated plea of no contest to second degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459) and admitted violating probation in case No. 62052476. Defendant was sentenced to a stipulated term of two years in case No. 62070888, to be served concurrently with the prison term of four years four months in case No. 62052476; imposed various fines and fees; and awarded credits for local time served. The court also imposed various fines and fees on case No. 62070888, and reimposed restitution fines previously imposed in case No. 62052476.
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 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.
DAVIS, J.