P. v. Nevotti
Filed 10/19/06 P. v. Nevotti CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Sacramento)
----
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ANGELO FRANCISCO NEVOTTI, Defendant and Appellant. | C051267
(Super. Ct. No. 03F08162)
|
A jury convicted defendant Angelo Francisco Nevotti of first and second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211; further undesignated section references are to the Penal Code) and two counts of kidnapping to commit robbery (§ 209, subd. (b)(1)). The jury also found true allegations defendant personally used a firearm in connection with the second degree robbery and the kidnapping to commit that robbery (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)). Defendant moved for a new trial. Thereafter, the parties executed a written stipulation whereby they agreed (1) defendant would withdraw his motion for a new trial, (2) the People would move for and be granted a new trial “in the interest of justice,” (3) defendant would plead guilty to two counts of first degree robbery and admit he personally used a firearm in the commission of the first offense and personally used a deadly weapon in the commission of the second offense (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)), (4) defendant would be sentenced to 18 years 4 months in state prison and (5) defendant would waive “all rights on appeal as to any and all issues raised to the above entitled matter.”
The trial court granted the People’s motion for a new trial, and defendant pleaded no contest to two counts of first degree robbery and admitted the firearm and deadly weapon enhancement allegations and that he was 17 years old at the time of both offenses. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 707.) Consistent with the parties’ written stipulation, the trial court sentenced defendant to 18 years 4 months in prison, consisting of the upper term of six years for the first count of first degree robbery, plus 10 years for the firearm enhancement, and 1 year 4 months (one-third the middle term) for the second count of first degree robbery, plus one year for the deadly weapon enhancement, with credit for 848 days (738 actual days and 110 good conduct). The court also ordered defendant to pay a $500 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)), a $500 parole revocation fine (§ 1202.45), victim restitution in the amount of $410 (§ 1202.4, subd. (f)), a $20 crime prevention fee (§ 1202.5), a $20 penalty assessment (§ 1464) and a $14 penalty assessment (Gov. Code,
§ 76000) and to provide samples (§ 296).
Defendant appeals. He did not obtain a certificate of probable cause. (§ 1237.5.)
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 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 of 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.
HULL , J.
We concur:
BLEASE , Acting P.J.
RAYE , J.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney referral.
Analysis and review provided by Vista Property line attorney.
