Opinion
D063019
08-09-2013
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JAY KRATT, Defendant and Appellant.
Sarah Kleven McGann, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
(Super. Ct. No. SCN295593)
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Daniel B. Goldstein, Judge. Affirmed.
Sarah Kleven McGann, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
A deputy sheriff concluded that Jay Kratt had been driving under the influence and arrested him. Kratt was charged with one count each of possession of a controlled substance and driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs within ten years of a prior offense of driving under the influence. The information also alleged that Kratt had two strike prior convictions.
The trial court found Kratt guilty of both charges. Kratt later admitted his two strike prior convictions. The trial court struck Kratt's prior strikes and imposed a middle term of two years. The court also imposed several fees and penalties, including a drug program fee and criminal justice administration fee. Kratt timely appealed.
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel filed a brief summarizing the facts and proceedings below. She presented no argument for reversal, but asked this court to review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Under Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel listed as possible but not arguable issues, whether the trial court erred in not determining Kratt's ability to pay the drug program fee and the criminal justice administration fee.
We granted Kratt permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not responded. Our review of the record pursuant to Wende, including the possible issues listed by counsel pursuant to Anders, has disclosed no reasonably arguable issues on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Kratt on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
MCINTYRE, J. WE CONCUR: HALLER, Acting P. J. O'ROURKE, J.