People v. Gaono 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 one possible issue that was considered in evaluating

Gaono separately appealed the order transferring his case from the juvenile court to criminal court. Our court affirmed the order in an unpublished opinion, People v. Meki G., D085507 (Nov. 18, 2025).

Notwithstanding the sentence, Gaono will be entitled to a “Youth Offender” parole hearing under Penal Code sections 3051 and 4801 after he has served 25 years of his sentence.

2 the potential merits of this appeal, namely whether the sentencing court abused its discretion in refusing to strike, dismiss, or vacate the section 12022.53, subdivision (d) enhancements attached to counts 1 and 2. We have independently reviewed the entire record for error as required by Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Gaono on this appeal.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

KELETY, J.

WE CONCUR:

MCCONNELL, P. J.

O’ROURKE, J.

3