Filed 7/11/17 P. v. Quintanilla 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
(Siskiyou)
----



THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

TELESFORO JUNIOR QUINTANILLA,

Defendant and Appellant.
C083195

(Super. Ct. No. MCYKCRBF20151452)








Appointed counsel for defendant Telesforo Junior Quintanilla asks this court to review the record to 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.
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, 123-124.)
BACKGROUND
Defendant and a codefendant (who is not party to this appeal) broke into the home of the two victims. One victim woke to see a gun pointed at her temple. Defendant and codefendant taped the victims’ hands and feet and said they would kill them if they moved. They also threatened that someone outside would burn down the house with them in it. They took the victims’ cell phones and cut the telephone lines.
When defendant and codefendant left, they took over $3,000 in cash and $41,000 in gold, along with jewelry and guns. They also stole the victims’ car.
Defendant agreed to plead no contest to four counts in exchange for a stipulated 13-year term, to be served at 85 percent. Defendant thereafter pleaded no contest to first degree residential robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) and admitted to using a firearm in its commission (Pen. Code, § 12022.53, subd. (b)). He also pleaded no contest to vehicle theft (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), possessing a firearm as a felon (Pen. Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1)), and dissuading a witness (Pen. Code, § 136.1, subd. (b)(1)). The remaining counts were dismissed.
The trial court imposed the stipulated 13-year term, consisting of the three-year low term for robbery, a 10-year enhancement for using a firearm, a concurrent two-year term for vehicle theft, a concurrent two-year term for possessing a firearm as a felon, and a concurrent 180 days for attempting to dissuade a witness. It awarded 533 days of credit (464 actual, 69 conduct). It also imposed various fines and fees, and reserved jurisdiction with regard to victim restitution.
Following the conviction, this court granted defendant’s request to file a notice of appeal under the constructive filing doctrine. Defendant thereafter filed a notice of appeal.
DISCUSSION
Counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and requests that we review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised of his 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.
Having examined the record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.



NICHOLSON , J.



We concur:



BLEASE , Acting P. J.




DUARTE , J.