P.

BACKGROUND

On two separate occasions, Skelton entered a home with the intent to commit theft. On

one of those occasions, a person was inside the home.

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 as possible, but not arguable, issues:

(1) whether Skelton's waiver of the right to appeal is valid; (2) whether the guilty plea is

constitutionally valid; (3) whether there was a sufficient factual basis for the plea; (4) whether the

restitution order was proper; (5) whether credits were calculated correctly; and (6) whether

defense counsel was ineffective.

We granted Skelton permission to file a brief on her own behalf. She 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. Skelton has been

competently represented by counsel on this…