People v. Anderson CA4/1

Opinion

Filed 4/28/26 P. v. Anderson CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D085253

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. SCD303712)

DEON ANDERSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Dwayne K. Moring, Judge. Affirmed. William D. Farber, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. Deon Anderson entered into a plea agreement in which he pleaded guilty to first degree robbery in an inhabited building (Pen. Code, §§ 211 & 212.5). Anderson admitted an aggravating factor and stipulated to a term of six years in prison. Before pleading guilty, Anderson moved to replace appointed counsel (People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118). The court held a hearing and denied Anderson’s request. Anderson again attempted to discharge and replace counsel at his sentencing hearing. The trial court denied the request. The court also declined to appoint counsel to investigate whether Anderson was provided with ineffective assistance of counsel. Anderson was sentenced to six years in prison for robbery concurrently with a three-year term for his conviction in San Diego Superior Court case No. SCD298042. Anderson filed a timely notice of appeal and obtained a certificate of probable cause. Appellate counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 indicating counsel has not been able to identify any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to independently review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We advised Anderson of his right to file his own brief on appeal, but he has not responded. 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 a possible issue which was considered in evaluating the potential merits of this appeal: Whether the court erred in denying Anderson’s Marsden motion to replace appointed counsel. We have independently reviewed the record for error as required by Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Anderson on this appeal. DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.

2 HUFFMAN, J.*

WE CONCUR:

KELETY, Acting P. J.

RUBIN, 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