Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County Super. Ct. No. SCN223995, Timothy M. Casserley, Judge.
McCONNELL, P. J.
A jury found Loraine Lewis guilty of grand theft by an employee (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (b)(3)). The court placed her on five years probation. Lewis appeals. We affirm.
BACKGROUND
REI fraud research and security coordinator, John Trinka, noticed a suspicious pattern of activity involving the employee number assigned to Lewis, who was a cashier in the Encinitas store. Between December 27, 2005 and November 1, 2006, Lewis completed 142 questionable returns for cash, with the transactions totaling $12,484.75. The returns were all for nonmembers who did not have receipts. Many of the items allegedly returned were missing from the store's inventory. Lewis was the only one working all of the times these returns were completed. She processed a total of 174 returns, while the employee with the next highest total processed 24 returns. After Lewis's employment was terminated, the suspicious pattern of activity stopped.
The defense presented several witnesses. A forensic document examiner testified she could not identify or eliminate Lewis as the person who wrote 12 refund slips. Three of Lewis's REI coworkers testified she gave them her computer password (as distinguished from her cash register password), but they did not use her employee number and password to process returns. One of these employees testified some employees found Lewis bossy and disliked her. Lewis testified she had the same password for the computer and the cash register, gave it to other employees, and never processed a fraudulent return. Two people who had known Lewis for at least nine years testified she was honest and trustworthy.
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, (1) whether there is substantial evidence of theft of $400 or more during the period of the offense; (2) whether the court erred by replacing four jurors after the jury was chosen and sworn; and (3) whether the definition of reasonable doubt in Judicial Council of California Criminal Jury Instructions (2006-2007), CALCRIM No. 220 violates Lewis's due process right to be convicted only upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
We granted Lewis 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, including the possible issues listed pursuant to Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issues. Lewis has been competently represented by counsel on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
WE CONCUR:HUFFMAN, J., NARES, J.