Court Opinion

ID: 9918387
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-12 20:02:04.46561+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:03:27.637545
License: Public Domain

Filed 1/12/24 P. v. Wells 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                                           NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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,                                                                                  C098475

                   Plaintiff and Respondent,                                     (Super. Ct. No. 23CR0043)

         v.

MICHAEL DAVID WELLS,

                   Defendant and Appellant.

         Appointed counsel for defendant Michael David Wells asked this court to review
the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v.
Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We will affirm.

                                                             1
                   FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
       On January 24, 2023, an information was filed charging Wells with second degree
robbery (Pen. Code, § 211; count 1)1 and misdemeanor battery (§ 242; count 2). As to
count 1, multiple aggravating factors were alleged. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule
4.421(b)(1), (2), (3)  (5).) In February 2023, Wells pled no contest to count 1 and
admitted three aggravating factors. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.21(b)(2), (3)  (5).) The
remaining allegations were dismissed with a waiver pursuant to People v. Harvey (1979)
25 Cal.3d 754.
       That same day, the trial court sentenced Wells to state prison for three years, as
agreed to by the parties. The trial court awarded Wells 59 days of custody credit. The
court imposed a $300 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)), a corresponding $300 parole
revocation fine (suspended unless parole is revoked) (§ 1202.45), a $40 court operations
fee (§ 1465.8, subd. (a)(1)), and a $30 criminal conviction assessment fee (Gov. Code,
§ 70373). Wells did not obtain a certificate of probable cause on appeal.
                                       DISCUSSION
       Appointed counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and
asking this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable
issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Wells was advised by
counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing the
opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication
from Wells.
       Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error
that would result in a disposition more favorable to Wells.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

                                              2
                                      DISPOSITION
       The judgment is affirmed.

                                                      /s/
                                                  BOULWARE EURIE, J.

We concur:

   /s/
DUARTE, Acting P. J.

    /s/
WISEMAN, J.

 Retired Associate Justice of the Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District, assigned by
the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

                                              3