People v. Mejia CA4/1

DISCUSSION

Mejia's appointed counsel has filed a brief summarizing the facts and proceedings

below. Counsel presents no argument for reversal of the judgment, but asks this court to

review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and

Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738. Counsel identifies the following possible, but

not arguable, issues for our review: (1) is Mejia's guilty plea constitutionally valid; (2)

2 did the trial court comply with its section 1192.5 duty to establish a sufficient factual

basis for Mejia's guilty plea; (3) did the court abuse its discretion by denying him

probation; (4) did the court abuse its discretion by selecting the upper term for his

stalking conviction; and (5) did the court err by not staying the sentence for his

residential burglary conviction pursuant to section 654?

We granted Mejia permission to file a supplemental brief on his own behalf, but

he has not responded. A review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra,

Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738 has disclosed no reasonably

arguable appellate issues. Mejia has been competently represented by…