Opinion
C084199
02-23-2018
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. 62119444)
This is an appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. We briefly recount the facts and procedural history in accordance with People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.
I. BACKGROUND
In January 2013, defendant Michael Dean Terry was discovered to have written multiple checks on his 82-year-old mother's bank account without her knowledge. At the time, defendant was subject to a criminal protective order with his mother as the protected party. He was in violation of the order by living with his mother.
Defendant was charged with theft from an elder (Pen. Code, § 368, subd. (d)), grand theft (§ 487, subd. (a)), forgery (§ 476), and disobeying a court order, a misdemeanor (§ 166, subd. (a)(4)).
Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. --------
Defendant was declared incompetent to stand trial on April 24, 2013. After the state hospital determined defendant's competency was restored, the trial court found defendant competent to stand trial and reinstituted proceedings on January 15, 2014. Defendant subsequently pleaded no contest to the theft from an elder charge and other charges and probation violations in unrelated cases. He was placed on five years' formal probation.
Defendant subsequently admitted violating his probation. The trial court terminated probation and sentenced defendant to a stipulated three-year county jail term, imposed various fines and fees, and awarded 609 days of presentence credit (266 jail time, 264 conduct, and 79 state hospital).
Defendant appeals. He did not obtain a certificate of probable cause.
II. DISCUSSION
Counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and requests that we review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised of his 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 examined the record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
III. DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
/S/_________
RENNER, J. We concur: /S/_________
BLEASE, Acting P. J. /S/_________
DUARTE, J.