Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from judgments of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Daniel B. Goldstein, Judge., Super. Ct. No. SCN249635
O'ROURKE, J.
Tammy Ann Bolson entered a negotiated guilty plea to grand theft by an employee (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (b)(3). The court sentenced her to the 16-month lower prison term and ordered her to pay $68,830 in restitution. Bolson appeals. We affirm.
BACKGROUND
Bolson was employed by Brinks Incorporated. On August 8, 2008, as she worked in a vault, a video camera showed her picking up money and apparently hiding it under her shirt. Immediately after this, Brinks employees discovered $50,000 missing.
Two counts dismissed with a Harvey waiver (People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754) were based on the following facts. On June 15, 2008, Bolson picked up $30,000 in cash from a store, but only $28,000 arrived at the bank. From 2007 to 2008, more than $100,000 was missing from a bank night depository and ATM serviced by Brinks. Bolson handled cash pickups there on 75 occasions before money was discovered missing.
Brinks claimed $68,830 in losses.
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. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel lists, as possible but not arguable issues, whether Bolson was properly advised of her constitutional rights and the consequences of her guilty plea and voluntarily waived her rights; whether the court abused its discretion by sentencing her to prison; and whether the restitution order was supported by evidence and the plea.
We granted Bolson permission to file a brief on her own behalf. She has not responded. A review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, including the possible issues listed pursuant to Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issues. Bolson has been competently represented by counsel on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
WE CONCUR: NARES, Acting P. J., HALLER, J.