People v. Morales CA4/1

DISCUSSION

As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks the court to independently review the record for error. To assist the court in its review, and in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel has identified two possible issues that were considered in evaluating the potential merits of this appeal. 1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion when denying Morales’s motion for mental health diversion. 2. Whether Morales waived his right to challenge the court’s denial of the motion for mental health diversion when he entered his guilty plea.

We discovered that the abstract of judgment does not accurately state the sentence imposed. It reflects the imposition of a variety of fines and fees. The trial court struck all fines and fees pursuant to People v. Duenas (2019) 30 Cal.App.5th 1157 and ordered that anything that could not be stricken be stayed. Although we will affirm the trial court’s orders, we will remand with directions to correct the abstract of judgment. 2 We have independently reviewed the record for error as required by Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on…