Filed 7/26/17 P. v. Brejcha 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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.

JONATHAN WAYNE BREJCHA,

Defendant and Appellant.


C083852

(Super. Ct. No. CRF1601333)





Appointed counsel for defendant Jonathan Wayne Brejcha 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 (Wende).) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we will affirm the judgment.
I
Defendant pleaded no contest to second degree robbery. (Pen. Code, § 211.) Sentencing was deferred on condition that defendant complete a six-month residential rehabilitation program, but if he failed to do so he would be sentenced to a stipulated upper term of five years in state prison with credits calculated at 85 percent. On successful completion of the program, he would receive probation for two to five years with up to one year in county jail. The prosecutor stated the factual basis for the plea as follows: “The defendant pushed the victim to the ground and took the victim’s hunting knife, wallet containing approximately $235 in cash along with his Social Security card, bank card and medical card.”
Defendant was admitted to a Salvation Army program, but was discharged the next day for medical reasons, with the proviso that he could return whenever he received medical clearance to work. But defendant failed to appear at a follow-up hearing. Defendant was arrested pursuant to a warrant. The trial court concluded defendant violated a Cruz waiver (People v. Cruz (1988) 44 Cal.3d 1247), failed to appear when he was no longer in residential treatment, failed to return to court in a timely manner, and thus was subject to imposition of judgment under the terms of the plea agreement.
The trial court imposed the stipulated five-year state prison sentence, awarded defendant 62 days of presentence credit (54 actual days and 8 conduct days), and ordered defendant to pay a $1,500 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)), a $1,500 parole revocation fine (§ 1202.45), a $40 fine under section 1202.5 (a $10 base fine plus $30 in assessments), a $40 court operations assessment (§ 1465.8), a $30 conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373), and $250 in victim restitution (§ 1202.4, subd. (f)).
II
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. (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 the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed and we received no communication from defendant.
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.



/S/
MAURO, J.



We concur:



/S/
NICHOLSON, Acting P. J.



/S/
HULL, J.