People v. Conroy CA4/1

DISCUSSION

As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Delgadillo and asks the court to conduct a Wende review of 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 one possible issue that was considered in evaluating the potential merits of this appeal: 1. Did the trial court err in denying CDCR’s request for recall and resentencing after verifying the sentencing enhancement status and did the denial affect appellant’s substantial rights? We have independently reviewed the record consistent with the requirements of Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any potentially meritorious issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Conroy on this appeal.

DISPOSITION

The order denying resentencing under sections 1172.7 and 1172.75 is affirmed.

KELETY, J.

WE CONCUR:

DATO, Acting P. J.

BUCHANAN, J.

The underlying facts of the residential burglaries are discussed in our unpublished opinion. (People v. Conroy (July 30, 1999, D032303) [nonpub. opn.].) 3