People v. Cravens CA3 ( 2024 )

Filed 10/25/24 P. v. Cravens 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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
(Tehama)
----
THE PEOPLE, C100051
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 23CR-000591)
v.
RANDALL TYLER CRAVENS,
Defendant and Appellant.
Appointed counsel for defendant Randall Tyler Cravens 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.) Finding no arguable errors that would result in a disposition more favorable to
Cravens, we will affirm the judgment.
BACKGROUND
In March 2023, Cravens used a utility knife to cut the security cord of two Apple
watches at an AT&T store and fled. An information charged Cravens with one count of
1
second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211; count I),1 with allegations that Cravens had
suffered a prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)) and a
prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)), as well as alleging an enhancement for
use of a deadly weapon (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)). Cravens was further charged with
misdemeanor possession of fentanyl (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a); count II).
In May 2023, criminal proceedings were suspended pursuant to section 1368. In
July 2023, Cravens was found competent and criminal proceedings were reinstated.
On August 21, 2023, after the trial court denied his Marsden2 motion, Cravens
pleaded guilty to second degree robbery as charged in count I and an added count III for
attempted robbery (§§ 664/211). The plea agreement contemplated a sentence of the
middle term of three years on count I and a maximum of three years concurrent on count
III. The remaining count and allegations were dismissed.
On September 28, 2023, Cravens filed a motion to withdraw his plea. The People
filed an opposition. The trial court denied the motion.
The trial court sentenced Cravens to three years on count I and three years
concurrent on count III.
Cravens filed a timely notice of appeal. The trial court granted Craven’s request
for a certificate of probable cause.
DISCUSSION
Appointed counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts and procedural
history of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there
are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Cravens
was advised by counsel of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days from the
1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
2 People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118.
2
date the opening brief was filed. More than 30 days have elapsed, and Cravens has not
filed a supplemental brief.
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record pursuant to Wende, we find
no arguable errors that are favorable to Cravens. Accordingly, we will affirm the
judgment.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
/s/
EARL, P. J.
We concur:
/s/
ROBIE, J.
/s/
MAURO, J.
3