1

Filed 6/16/16 P. v. Jones 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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.

TERRELL DWAYNE JONES,

Defendant and Appellant. C080584

(Super. Ct. No. CRF15434)

This case comes to us pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal. 3d 436 ( Wende ).

Having reviewed the record as required by Wende , 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.)

B ACKGROUND

A felony complaint charged defendant Terrell Dwayne Jones with sec ond degree

burglary (Pen. Code, § 459 ; count 1 ; undesignated statutory re ferences are to the Penal2

Code), grand theft ( § 487, subd. (a) ; count 2) , false information to a peace officer

( § 148.9, subd. (a) ; count 3) , and possession of a controlled substance

(methamphetamine) (Health & Saf. Code

, § 11377, subd. (a) ; count 4). Wit h respect to

counts 1 and 2, it was also alleged that defendant had a prior strike conviction.

(§ § 1170.12, subds. (b) & (c), 667, subds. (d) & (e).)

Pursuant to a negotiated disposition, defendant pleaded guilty t o grand theft and

admitted the prior strike allegation. With respect to the theft offense , d efendant admitted

that he stole a handheld invoice computer and printer from a deliveryman who had le ft

these devices on a counter in a market. As part of the plea agreement, t he parties agree d

th at defendant would be placed on probation and the remaining counts and the prior strike

allegation would be dismissed if he completed a residential treatment program. T he

parties further agreed that if defendant did not complete the program he would b e

sentenced to six years in state prison.

D efendant failed to successfully complete the residential drug treatment program.

As a consequence, the trial court sentenced him to s ix years in prison, with credit for time

served of 96 days. The trial court also imposed a $300 restitution fine ( § 1202.4, subd.

(b)), a suspended parole revocation restitution fine in the amount of $300 ( § 1202.45), a

$40 court operations fee ( § 1465.8, subd. (a)), and a $30 conviction assessment fee (Gov.

Code

, § 70373)

.

De fendant filed a timely notice of appeal. The trial court granted defendant’s

request for a certificate of probable cause.

We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening

brief that sets forth the facts of the case and r equests this court to review the record and

determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. ( 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. To date, d efendant has not filed a

supplemental brief. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record pursuant to3

Wende , we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to

defendant.

D ISPOSITION

The judg ment is affirmed.

HULL , Acting P. J.

We concur:

ROBIE , J.

BUTZ , J.