Filed 11/20/24 P. v. Lopez CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (San Joaquin) ----

THE PEOPLE, C100496 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. STK-CR-FE- 2023-0009262) v. ALEX LOPEZ, Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Alex Lopez filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) After independently examining the record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to Lopez. We therefore affirm.

BACKGROUND The complaint charged Lopez with assault with a deadly weapon and alleged that he had a prior strike conviction. (Pen. Code, §§ 245, subd. (a)(1), 1170.12, subd. (b),

667, subd. (d).)1 It also alleged as aggravating factors that Lopez had numerous prior convictions and served a prior prison or jail term. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421(b)(2), (3).)

Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, Lopez pleaded no contest to assault with a deadly weapon and admitted a prior strike conviction in exchange for the low term of two years doubled. He stipulated that the factual basis for the plea was that he approached the victim with a knife and waved it toward him. The trial court accepted the plea and, consistent with the parties’ agreement, dismissed the remaining allegations in the complaint as well as a separate case with a waiver under People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754.

As the parties had agreed, the trial court sentenced Lopez to the low term of two years, doubled to four years due to his prior strike conviction. The court imposed various fines and fees and ordered restitution in the amount of $2,854.37.

Lopez filed a timely notice of appeal. The trial court denied his request for a certificate of probable cause.

DISCUSSION Lopez’s appointed counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and asking this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Lopez 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 him.

Having examined the record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to Lopez.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.

/s/ FEINBERG, J.

We concur:

/s/ ROBIE, Acting P. J.

/s/ KRAUSE, J.