Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, David. M. Szumowski, Judge. Super. Ct. No. SCD211527
BENKE, Acting P. J.
In 2008 Astrailia Zera Dunford entered a negotiated guilty plea to resisting an executive officer (Pen. Code, § 69), a felony, and disobeying a court order (Pen. Code, § 273.6, subd. (a)), a misdemeanor. The court suspended imposition of sentence and placed her on three years' probation. In 2010 Dunford admitted violating probation, and the court revoked and reinstated probation. Dunford appeals. We affirm.
BACKGROUND
In 2008 Dunford unlawfully resisted an executive officer with force and violated a restraining order. In 2010 Dunford violated probation by leaving the state without permission, drinking alcohol, failing to remain law abiding and refusing to identify herself to a police officer.
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 Dunford was properly advised before admitting the probation violation; (2) whether the admission was valid; (3) whether Dunford's waiver of credit for time spent in a residential treatment facility was valid; (4) whether the court abused its discretion by adding terms and conditions when it reinstated probation; (5) whether the court had the authority to issue a protective order as a probation condition; and (6) whether the court abused its discretion by twice denying Dunford's request for a certificate of probable cause.
We granted Dunford 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. Dunford has been competently represented by counsel on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
WE CONCUR:NARES, J., IRION, J.