People v. Rodriguez CA2/6

Discussion Where, as here, appointed counsel finds no arguable issues in an appeal that is not from the first appeal after conviction, appellant is not entitled to our independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, or its federal constitutional counterpart, Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738. (Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 226.) He is, however, entitled to appellate consideration of any contentions raised in his supplemental brief. (Id. at p. 232.) In his supplemental brief, appellant contends defense counsel was “ineffective” because counsel only spoke to him two times about the case, failed to object to the admission of evidence at trial, and failed to refute the prosecutor’s “biased” and “false” statements regarding appellant’s history of violence and the risk of danger he posed to the community. Although somewhat unclear, appellant appears to contend that but for counsel’s

3 deficient performance, he would have been resentenced to a lower term at the section 1172.75 hearing. To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must show his trial counsel’s performance was deficient and that he was prejudiced by the…