Full Opinion

Filed 10/28/26 P. v. Robles CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Trinity) THE PEOPLE, C105579 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 25F151A) v. IAN MICHAEL ALMON ROBLES, Defendant and Appellant. Appointed counsel for defendant Ian Michael Almon Robles asked this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we will affirm the judgment. I In November 2025, California Highway Patrol (CHP) officers were in pursuit of a white Ford truck which had been reported stolen. They put out a spike strip to stop the truck, puncturing most of the tires. The truck continued to flee, ultimately driving on its rims in the wrong direction of traffic, nearly causing several traffic collisions. The truck eventually drove into a ditch and became stuck. Police approached with weapons drawn and ordered the occupants to exit the vehicle. The driver continued to rev the engine, causing the rear wheels to spin. Eventually, a man on the passenger side rolled down his window and extended his hands. The driver and passenger then followed orders to exit 1 the vehicle and were taken into custody. They both appeared under the influence of drugs. Defendant was identified as the driver, and the passenger was identified as his brother. Defendant admitted picking up his brother in the truck and driving during the CHP pursuit but denied stealing the truck. A search of the truck revealed, among other things, a glass bong, a burned metal straw, burnt tin foil, a smoking device with a liquid substance, a bag of marijuana, and used syringes. Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement with a maximum sentence of two years eight months, defendant pleaded no contest to driving or taking a vehicle without consent (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a) -- count one), fleeing a peace officer while driving recklessly (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a) -- count four), and driving under the influence of a drug (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (f) -- count five). At sentencing, defense counsel requested probation and in-patient drug treatment. The trial court denied probation, noting the circumstances of defendant’s arrest and his criminal history, including several prior drug convictions. Consistent with the plea agreement, the trial court sentenced defendant to the middle term of two years in prison on count one; a consecutive eight months (one-third the middle term) on count four; and a concurrent 180 days in county jail on count five. It awarded 93 days of presentence credit (47 actual and 46 conduct) and ordered a $1,200 restitution fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.4, subd. (b)), a $1,200 parole revocation fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.45), a $160 court operations assessment (Pen. Code, § 1465.8), a $120 criminal conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373), and victim restitution in the amount of $5,621.20. Defendant did not request a certificate of probable cause. II Appointed counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and asking this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel 2 of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing 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. /S/ MAURO, Acting P. J. We concur: /S/ RENNER, J. /S/ BOULWARE EURIE, J. 3