Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Super. Ct. No. SF112297A
BLEASE, Acting P. J.
This case comes to us pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Having reviewed the record as required by Wende, we affirm the judgment.
Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 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.
We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)
On July 7, 2009, officers contacted defendant Scott Brian Vick, who was living in a motor home on a street. The officers determined that defendant, who was required to register as a sex offender pursuant to Penal Code section 290, had become a transient approximately two to three months earlier, yet had failed to update his registration status accordingly.
Defendant pled guilty to failure to register as a transient sex offender (Pen. Code, § 290.011). In exchange for his plea, it was agreed he would be placed on formal probation and ordered to served 120 days in county jail. The trial court sentenced him accordingly. Defendant was ordered to pay a $200 restitution fine and awarded three days of custody credit.
Defendant appeals. He did not obtain a certificate of probable cause. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5.)
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: NICHOLSON, J., RAYE, J.