1 Filed 7/29/14 P. v. Dumont CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (El Dorado)

----

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. RALPH EUGENE DUMONT, Defendant and Appellant. C074937 (Super. Ct. No. P12CRF0264)

Counsel for defendant Ralph Eugene Dumont has filed an opening brief that sets
forth the facts of the case and asks this cour t to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. 1 ( People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.)

1 Defendant was advised by counsel of the ri ght to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More th an 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant.2 Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, 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.) At approximately 12:30 a.m. on May 9, 2012, officers were dispatched to defendant’s residence in response to a distur bance call. Defendant had been intoxicated, yelling and screaming, and th reatening to “slit [his wife ’s] throat and kill her.” Defendant was charged with making criminal th reats and it was alleged he served a prior prison term. (Pen. Code , §§ 422, 667.5.) On June 11, 2012, defendant pled no contest to making criminal threats and was placed on probation on the condition, inter alia , that he obey all laws. The trial court ordered defendant pay various fi nes and fees to taling $1,020. On November 5, 2012, a petition for revo cation of proba tion was filed, alleging
defendant had committed domestic violence in violation of Pena l Code section 243, subdivision (e)(1). However, on July 25, 2013, the trial court found defendant in violation of probation based upon his co nvictions, in El Dorado County case No. P12CRF0251, for driving un der the influence. On October 4, 2013, the trial court senten ced defendant to eight months (one-third the midterm) for making criminal threats, to run consecutively to the nine-year term previously imposed in El Do rado County case No. P12CRF 0251, for an aggregate term of nine years eight months. The trial court ordered defendant pay the previously imposed fines in the sum of $1,020, plus a civil asse ssment and a failure to pay for a total of $1,327. It also ordered defendant pay a $460 probation report fee. Defendant was awarded 120 days of pres entence custody credit. Defendant appeals. His request for a ce rtificate of probable cause was denied. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5.)3 Having undertaken an examination of th e entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a dispositi on more favorable to defendant.
DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.

ROBIE , J.

We concur:

BLEASE , Acting P. J.

DUARTE , J.