People v. Sprague CA3

Filed 7/12/16 P. v. Sprague CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Sacramento) ---- THE PEOPLE, C080987 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 15F06208) v. PASQUALE RAYMOND SPRAGUE, Defendant and Appellant. Appointed counsel for defendant Pasquale Raymond Sprague has filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we will affirm the judgment. 1 BACKGROUND 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.) On October 7, 2015, 41 live rounds of .22-long rifle ammunition were found in the backseat of defendant’s car. Defendant pleaded no contest to being a felon in possession of ammunition. (Pen. Code, § 30305, subd. (a)(1).) Per the parties’ agreement, the trial court sentenced defendant to 120 days in county jail, awarded 13 days presentence custody credit, and placed defendant on probation. The trial court imposed a $300 restitution fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.4, subd. (b)), a corresponding probation revocation fine suspended unless probation is revoked (Pen. Code, § 1202.44), a criminal impact fee (Pen. Code, § 1465.7, subd. (a)), a $40 court operations fee (Pen. Code, § 1465.8), and a $30 conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373). Defendant obtained a certificate of probable cause. DISCUSSION We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks us to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Counsel advised defendant of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from defendant. We have undertaken an examination of the entire record and find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant. 2 DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed. /s/ Blease, Acting P. J. We concur: /s/ Murray, J. /s/ Duarte, J. 3