Filed 4/20/18 P. v. Romero CA6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT


THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

FABIAN MARCUS ROMERO,

Defendant and Appellant.
H043589
(Santa Clara County
Super. Ct. Nos. C1224499 &
C1226663)


Defendant Fabian Marcus Romero appeals from his judgment of conviction after we remanded this case for resentencing. Defendant’s appointed counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) that raises no issue. We notified defendant of his right to submit written argument on this own behalf within 30 days. The 30-day period has elapsed and we have not received written argument from defendant.
Pursuant to Wende, we have reviewed the entire record and find that there is no arguable issue on appeal. We affirm the judgment.
DISCUSSION
Defendant first appealed after the trial court sentenced him to a total of 15 years and four months in prison for his no contest pleas in Santa Clara County Superior Court case Nos. C1224499 and C1226663. In case No. C1224499, defendant was sentenced to six years for second degree robbery (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 212.5, subd. (b)), plus five years for his prior serious felony conviction of attempted carjacking (§ 667, subd. (a)), and another three years for the prior prison term that defendant had served for the same attempted carjacking (§ 667.5, subd. (a)).
In case No. C1226663, defendant was sentenced to one year and four months for grand theft (§§ 484, 487, subd. (a)). Defendant was also sentenced to separate concurrent terms of one year and four months for three counts of selling or aiding in selling stolen property (§ 496, subd. (a)). (People v. Romero (Sept. 14, 2015, H040927) [nonpub. opn.].)
We reversed the judgment and remanded the matter for resentencing after finding that the trial court erred by using defendant’s prior conviction for attempted carjacking as both a prior serious felony (§ 667, subd. (a)), and a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (a)) to enhance his sentence.
Upon remand, on March 4, 2016, the trial court resentenced defendant to a total of 15 years in state prison. In case No. C1224499, defendant was sentenced to 10 years for second degree robbery (§§ 211, 212.5, subd. (b)), plus five years for his prior serious felony conviction of attempted carjacking (§ 667, subd. (a)).
In case No. C1226663, defendant was sentenced to two years for one count of grand theft (§§ 484, 487, subd. (a)). Defendant was also sentenced to separate terms of two years for three counts of selling or aiding in selling stolen property (§ 496, subd. (a)). The sentence in case No. C1226663 was ordered to run concurrent to the 15-year term imposed in case No. C1224499.
After reviewing the record in this case, we conclude that there is no arguable issue on appeal.

DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.





_______________________________
Greenwood, P.J.




WE CONCUR:





_______________________________________________
Bamattre-Manoukian, J.











______________________________________
Grover, J.