People v. Rubin CA4/1

DISCUSSION

Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief summarizing the facts and

proceedings below. Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks this court to

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

(Wende). Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders) counsel

mentions the following as possible but not arguable issues: (1) whether the court

improperly considered Rubin's subsequent offense in declining to dismiss the strike; (2)

whether the court erred by denying Rubin's request to dismiss the strike; and (3) whether

the court should have awarded sentencing credits on the instant offenses.

Further statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 We granted Rubin permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not

responded. A review of the record pursuant to Wende and Anders, including the possible

issues listed pursuant to Anders, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issues.

Rubin has been competently represented by appellate counsel.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

NARES, Acting P. J.

WE CONCUR:

McDONALD, J.

IRION, J.

3