Filed 1/8/15 P. v. Stewart CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.
CORNELIUS STEWART,
Defendant and Appellant. B257029
(Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. TA130864)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Eleanor J. Hunter, Judge. Affirmed. Richard L. Fitzer under appointment by the Court of Appeal , for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Respondent.

_______________2 Appellant Cornelius Stewart pled no contest to one count of second degree robbery in violation of Penal Code sec tion 211 and admitted that the robbery was
committed for the benefit of a cr iminal street gang within th e meaning of section 186.22, subdivision (b)(1)(C). Appellant also admitted that he suffered a prior serious felony conviction within the meaning of Penal Code se ction 667, subdivision (a). The trial court sentenced appellant to the upper term of five years for the robbery conviction, plus a fiveyear enhancement for the prior serious felo ny conviction. The court also sentenced appellant to a ten-year enhancement term pursuant to Penal Code section 186.22, but stayed imposition of that sentence on the cond ition that appellant have no contact with the victims while in prison. Appellant appeals from the judgment of conviction. Finding no error, we affirm.

Facts 1 On November 14, 2013, Ri ckey Powell and Randall Tate drove to the Nickerson Gardens Apartments in Los A ngeles. While parked and wa iting for a friend, they were approached by a group of seven to ten men who told them to get out of the car. Many in the group were carrying guns. Someone in the group said, “It’s Bounty Hunters.” Two of the men took jewelry, cash and cell phone s from Powell and Tate. They also took
Powell’s new Air Jordan sneakers. The men s earched Powell’s car and then told them to
leave. Powell and Tate reported the robbery to Los Angeles Police Department. Someone from the Department showed them a photo of a man carrying white shoes
which Powell identified as his stolen Air Jo rdans. Both men described the photo as blurry.

1 The facts are taken from the preliminary hearing in this matter.3 Powell and Tate were then taken back to Nickerson Ga rdens, where they viewed appellant in a field show-up. According to Officer Chris Giargiari, both men viewed appellant from a distance of about 25 yards. Both men stated that appellant was the person who had robbed them. At the preliminary hearing, Powell and Tate acknowledged that they had previously identified appellant in the field show-up, but clai med that it was a mistake. Both men testified that appellant was not one of the two lead robbers. Tate claimed that they viewed the suspec t in the field show-up from a distan ce of 400 feet. When Tate was
asked if he had been threatened since the r obbery, he replied that he had been getting phone calls.

Discussion Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal, and we appointed counsel to represent him on appeal. Appellant’s counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, and requested this co urt to independently review the record on appeal to determine whether an y arguable issues exist. On October 7, 2014, we advised appellant he had 30 days in wh ich to personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to cons ider. No response has been
received to date.
We have examined the entire record and ar e satisfied appellant’s attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and no arguable issues exist. ( People v. Wende
, supra , 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)4 DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

GOODMAN, J. 

We concur:

MOSK, Acting P.J.

KRIEGLER, J.

 Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.