Filed 2/25/16 P. v. Stowe CA2/8

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

KEVIN S TOWE

,

Defendant and Appellant. B 263091

(Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. BA428775 )

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County.

Katherine Mader

, Judge. Affirmed.

David R. Geifinger

, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and

Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

* * * * * * * * * *2

Defendant Kevin Stowe was charged by information with one count of second

degree robbery ( Pen. Code

, § 211 )

, with prior strike, seriou s violent felony, and prison

term allegations ( §§ 1170, 1170, subd. (h) , 667.5, subd. (b), 667, subd. (a)(1) , 1170.12 )

.

Before trial, defendant’ s counsel declared a doubt as to his competence. Defendant was

examined by a psychiatrist, and the court concl uded that defendant was competent to

stand trial. Defendant voluntarily absented himself from trial.

Defendant was convicted by jury of robbery, and a jury found his prior conviction

and prison term allegations to be true

. T he trial court denied defe ndant’ s Romero 1

motion to dismiss his strike conviction. Defendant was sentenced to the mid term of three

years for the robbery, which was doubled because of his strike prior, as well as a

consecutive five years for his serious felony prior conviction. De fendant was also

sentenced to two 1

- year terms for his prison priors, which the trial court struck

.

Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal.

W e appointed appellate counsel to represent defendant

. Appointed counsel filed a

brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 ( Wende ) in which no issues were

raised. The brief included a declaration from counsel that he reviewed the record and

sent a letter to defendant explaining his evaluation of the record. Counsel further

declared that he advised defendant of his right, under Wende , to submit a supplemental

brief. Defendant did not file any supplemental brief with this court.

The following evidence was adduced at trial: On August 27, 2014, Joselito Abo

was at a bus stop in downtown Los Ange les when defendant put his hand in Mr. Abo’ s

pocket and tried to take cash and other possessions from Mr. Abo. Mr. Abo struggled to

retain his possessions . D efendant slammed him into a bus pole, and took the items from

Mr. Abo ’ s pocket. As defendant wal ked away, a man confronted defendant, an d

defendant dropped some of Mr. Abo’ s possessions. Mr. Abo called 911, defendant was

detained, and Mr. Abo identified defendant in a field show up.

1 People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497 ( Romer o ).3

We have examined the entire record, consisting of two volumes of a clerk’ s

transcript , the exhibits to counsel’ s request to augment the record on appeal, and three

volume s of a reporter’ s transcript, and are satisfied that appointed counsel fully complied

with his responsibilities and that no arguable appellate issu es exist. ( People v. Kelly

(2006) 40 Cal.4th 106; Wende

, supra , 25 Cal.3d 436.)

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed

.

GRIMES, J.

WE CONCUR:

BIGELOW , P. J.

RUBIN , J.