Opinion
C097786
06-27-2023
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DAMON RAY TULLIS, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
(Super. Ct. No. CR63992)
RENNER, J.
Appointed counsel for defendant Damon Ray Tullis 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 (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) After reviewing the entire record, we affirm the judgment.
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.)
I. BACKGROUND
At the time of the charged offenses, defendant was on probation. A semiautomatic shotgun was found at defendant's residence during the execution of a search warrant. He was charged with one count of possession of a firearm by a felon (Pen. Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1)-count I); one count of possession of ammunition (§ 30305, subd. (a)(1)-count II); and receiving stolen property, a motor vehicle (§ 496d, subd. (a) -count III).
Further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
On December 19, 2022, defendant pled no contest to possession of a firearm by a felon. In exchange, the trial court dismissed the remaining charges and defendant agreed to a maximum sentence of three years. The stipulated factual basis for defendant's plea was taken from the probation report. The court denied probation and imposed a sentence of two years in prison, the middle term. The court granted two actual days of custody credit. The court imposed a restitution fine in the amount of $300 (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)), and imposed, but suspended, a parole revocation fine in an equal amount (§ 1202.45). Finally, the court ordered defendant to pay a $30 criminal conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373), and a $40 court operations assessment (§ 1465.8).
Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal but did not obtain a certificate of probable cause.
II. DISCUSSION
Appointed counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts and procedural history of the case and requests 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 his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days from the date the opening brief was filed. More than 30 days have elapsed, and defendant has not filed a supplemental brief.
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record pursuant to People v. Wende, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant. Accordingly, we will affirm the judgment.
III. DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: DUARTE, Acting P. J., HORST, J. [*]
[*] Judge of the Placer County Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.