People v. Spillane 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 which were considered in evaluating the potential merits of this appeal. 1. Whether the court erred in selecting the middle term in prison for the lead charge. 2. Whether the court erred by failing to strike both strike priors. We have independently reviewed the record for error as required by Wende and Anders. We have not identified any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Spillane on this appeal.

2

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

HUFFMAN, J.*

WE CONCUR:

DATO, Acting P. J.

CASTILLO, J.

* Retired Associate Justice of the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution. 3