Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County No. FMB007211. William Jefferson Powell IV, Judge.
Lynelle K. Hee, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
RAMIREZ P.J.
Statement of the Case
On March 6, 2006, a Petition for Revocation of Probation was filed which alleged that defendant failed to comply with numerous terms of his formal grant of probation. On August 22, 2007, defendant, represented by counsel, waived his right to a Vickers hearing and admitted that he violated the terms of his probation. The trial court revoked defendant’s probation and sentenced defendant to the upper term of three years on count 1 (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (a)(1)(D), failure to register).
People v. Vickers (1972) 8 Cal.3d 451.
On September 7, 2007, defendant filed a timely notice of appeal challenging the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea.
Because defendant pled nolo contendere prior to the preliminary hearing and because the factual basis for defendant’s plea was stipulated to, this statement is based on the probation report.
On December 18, 2004, San Bernardino County Sheriff’s arrested defendant for battery on his wife, Sabrina Sumaya. During the booking process, police discovered defendant had lived at his current address for more than one year and had failed to register as a sex offender pursuant to Penal Code section 290.
On March 6, 2006, the probation office filed a petition to revoke defendant’s probation, alleging defendant had failed to report to probation (term 3), cooperate with the probation officer in a plan of rehabilitation (term 4), seek and maintain gainful employment or attend school (term 5), keep the probation officer informed of place of residence (term 7), register pursuant to section 290 (term 11), pay a restitution fine (term 13), and complete an anger management class (term 14). Defendant admitted that he had violated the terms of probation.
Defendant appealed, and upon his request this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493] setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record.
We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.
We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
Disposition
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: KING J., MILLER J.