People v. Farmer CA4/2

DISCUSSION

Defendant appealed and, upon his request, this court appointed counsel to

represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979)

25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, setting forth a statement of

the case and two potential arguable issues: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying his

All further statutory references will be to the Penal Code, unless otherwise noted.

2 motion to suppress; and (2) whether defendant’s trial counsel provided ineffective

assistance by failing to argue that defendant was illegally detained, and that all evidence

flowing from the illegal detention should have been suppressed. Counsel has also

requested this court to undertake a review of the entire record.

We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which

he has not done.

Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have

conducted an independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.

Although not raised by the parties, we note one apparent clerical error. Defendant

pled guilty to count 3 on June 7, 2012. The court then asked whether the People

“move[d]…