People v. Murillo CA4/1

DISCUSSION

As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks the court to review the record for error. To assist the court in its review, and in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel has identified two possible issues that were considered in evaluating the potential merits of this appeal. 1. Whether the court erred in denying any sentence reduction based on a finding that Murillo posed an unreasonable risk to public safety. 2. Whether the court erred in applying the standard “endanger public safety” found in section 1385 rather than the “unreasonable risk to public safety” described in section 1170.18. We have reviewed the record for error as required by Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Murillo on this appeal.

3

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

HUFFMAN, J.

WE CONCUR:

McCONNELL, P. J.

RUBIN, J.

4