THE PEOPLE v. FERNANDO URANGA SANCHEZ (2011)

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

Fernando Uranga Sanchez appeals from the judgment entered upon his convictions by jury of three counts of robbery (Pen.Code, § 211, counts 1, 4, & 5) ¹ and one count of attempted robbery (§§ 664, 211, count 6).   In connection with counts 1 and 6, the jury found to be true the firearm use allegation within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivision (b).  The trial court sentenced appellant on count 1 to the midterm of three years plus 10 years for the firearm enhancement, and to consecutive sentences of one-third the midterm, or eight months, for the attempted robbery on count 6 plus one-third the midterm, or three years four months, for the firearm enhancement on that count, and to one-third the midterm, or one year, on counts 4 and 5, for an aggregate sentence of 19 years.   The trial court awarded 292 days of custody credits composed of 254 days of actual credits and 38 days of conduct credits pursuant to section 2933.1, subdivision (c).  The custody credits were subsequently increased by one day, to 255 days, thereby increasing the total presentence credits to 293 days.

Appellant's convictions arose out of a series of robberies and attempted robberies in March and April 2009:  a March 20, 2009 robbery of $4,000 to $6,000 from Jalco Liquor Store in El Monte, using a palm-sized chrome gun;  an April 24, 2009 robbery of $400 to $500 from Ted's Quality Meats in El Monte;  a second robbery on April 24, 2009 of $300 from Mike's Liquor Store in South El Monte, using what appellant told the victim was “a real gun;” and an April 6, 2009 attempted robbery, of Benny's Market and Liquor Store in Azusa, using a gun, where appellant left the store before taking anything because the owner's son entered the store.

With respect to each of the robberies, appellant was identified as the robber or attempted robber by (1) the victims, (2) videos taken on the surveillance cameras at each of the locations, (3) appellant's identifying clothing, and/or (4) appellant's admissions in postarrest interviews with police officers.

After examination of the record, counsel filed an “Opening Brief” in which no issues were raised.   On October 19, 2010, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to consider.   No response has been received to date.

We have examined the entire record, including the in camera Marsden ² hearings on October 16, 2009 and November 25, 2009, and are satisfied that appellant's attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist.  (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

FN1. All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated..  FN1. All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.

FN2. People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118..  FN2. People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118.

THE COURT: * FN*.  BOREN, P. J., ASHMANN-GERST, J., CHAVEZ, J.