1

Filed 10/18/22 P. v. B o land CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Yuba)

----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.
DANIEL EVAN BOLAND,

Defendant and Appellant. C095888
(Super. Ct. No. CRF20

- 2579)

Appointed counsel for defendant Daniel Evan Boland has asked this court to conduct an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. ( People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal. 3d 436.) We will affirm

. 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

- 111
, 123

- 124. )

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In November 2020, defendant was driving a pickup truck that had been reported

stolen. The ignition switch had been tampered with and there were exposed wires. The owner never gave defendant permission to drive the vehicle.2

In August 2021, defendant was out on bail but failed to appear for a required hearing. Defendant was charged with driving a vehicle without the owner’s consent (Veh.
Code, § 10851, subd. (a)

— count 1) and receipt of a stolen vehicle

. (Pen. Code, § 496d

— count 2

. ) 1 With respect to both counts, it further was alleged defendant suffered a prior

strike. ( § 667, subds. ( b)

- (j).)
In December 2021, defendant pleaded no contest to count 1 and admitted the prior

strike

. The court dismissed the remaining allegations. Defendant also entered a no contest plea in a separate case (case No. CRF21

- 1765) for failure to appear whi le on bail ( § 1320.5) and admitted a prior strike as to that case

. ( § 667, subds. (b)

- (j)

. ) In exchange, defendant agreed to a four

- year aggregate prison sentence.

I n February 2022, the trial court sentenced defendant to prison for an aggregate
term of four years, as follows: 16 months for driving a vehicle without the owner’s

consent in the instant case
, plus 32 months for failure to appear in case No. CRF21

- 1765

. The court also im

posed two $ 3 00 restitution fine s ( § 1202.4, subd. (b)), a nd two corresponding $ 3 00 parole revocation restitution fine s (suspended unless parole is revoked) ( § 1202.4 5 ), a n $ 8 0 court operations assessment ( § 1465.8, subd. (a)(1)), and a $ 6 0 criminal convict ion assessment

. (Gov. Code, § 703 7 3

. ) In the instant case, the court also awarded 428 days of custody credit. Defendant did not obtain a certificate of probable cause on appeal.

DISCUSSION Defendant’s appointed counsel has asked this court to conduct an independent review of the record to 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

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.3

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. We have undertaken an examination of the entire record and find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.

KRAUSE , J.

We concur:

MAURO , Acting P . J.

RENNER , J.