Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, No. SCE271918, Allan J. Preckel, Judge.
NARES, Acting P. J.
Robert Steven Carson entered a negotiated guilty plea to first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)) while released on bail pending final judgment on an earlier offense (§ 12022.1, subd. (b)) and with personal use of a deadly weapon (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)). Carson admitted one violent felony prison prior (§ 667.5, subd. (a)), two serious felony priors (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)) and five strikes (§ 667, subds. (b)-(i)). The court sentenced Carson to the stipulated term of 91 years to life in prison: 25 years to life for murder, tripled; one year for the deadly weapon enhancement; two years for the on-bail enhancement; three years for the violent felony prison prior; and five years for each serious felony prior. Carson appeals. We affirm.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
While out on bail in another case and pending judgment, Carson willfully, deliberately and with premeditation murdered the victim with a hammer.
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 lists as possible but not arguable issues: (1) whether Carson was advised of his rights before entering into the plea bargain; (2) whether there is a factual basis for the plea; (3) whether the court erred by incorporating the preliminary hearing transcript as part of the factual basis, in addition to Carson's statement; (4) whether Carson may challenge the denial of his Marsden motions on appeal after pleading guilty; and (5) whether he may challenge his guilty plea on appeal.
We granted Carson permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He 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. Carson has been competently represented by counsel on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
WE CONCUR: McINTYRE, J., AARON, J.