Filed 4/4/18 P. v. Tellyer CA5



NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

TODD LANCE TELLYER,

Defendant and Appellant.

F075535

(Super. Ct. No. BF166248A)


OPINION

THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Judith K. Dulcich, Judge.
Lindsay Sweet, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

-ooOoo-



Appointed counsel for defendant Todd Lance Tellyer asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We sent a letter to defendant, advising him of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. Defendant did not respond. On review, we find no arguable issues.
We provide the following brief description of the factual and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)
On November 12, 2016, defendant went into a Kohl’s store in Bakersfield. Loss prevention officers observed him taking a pair of shoes into the dressing room, leaving with them concealed under his shirt, and walking toward the exit. They recognized defendant as someone who had shoplifted at the store previously. They called the police.
Near the exit, Anthony T., one of the loss prevention officers, approached defendant and identified himself. He asked defendant for the shoes, but defendant continued walking away and out of the store. Outside the store, two more loss prevention officers approached. Anthony again told defendant to give the merchandise back. Defendant refused, then lunged at Anthony and cut him with his keys. Anthony grabbed defendant’s wrists and was able to get defendant’s keys. Defendant got in his car and put the shoes under the floor mat. He asked for his keys, but Anthony refused to return them. Defendant ran into another store. A police officer arrived and arrested defendant. Defendant told the officer he could not be charged with robbery, only shoplifting, as he had been before.
Anthony testified that defendant had stolen underwear and T-shirts from the same store on October 21, 2016. He had put them under his shirt and left the packaging in the dressing room. When Anthony approached him and asked for the merchandise, defendant left the store and drove away in the same car.
On March 16, 2017, a jury found defendant guilty of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 212.5, subd. (c)).
On April 21, 2017, the trial court sentenced defendant to the upper term of five years. The court also imposed various fines and fees.
On April 24, 2017, defendant filed a notice of appeal.
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no evidence of ineffective assistance of counsel or any other arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.