People v. Rackley CA4/1

Filed 3/5/15 P. v. Rackley CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D066158

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. SCE322135, SCD230576) REECE L. RACKLEY,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County,

Kenneth K. So and Timothy R. Walsh, Judges. Affirmed.

Elisabeth A. Bowman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant

and Appellant.

No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.

This case presents an appeal from the sentences imposed following the revocation

of probation in two separate felony cases. Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to

People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), indicating she has been unable to

identify any reasonably arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks this court to

review the record for error as required by Wende. As we will set forth below, counsel has

identified three possible, but not arguable issues to assist the court in the review of the

record as required by Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders). We offered the

appellant the opportunity to file her own brief on appeal, but she has not responded.