People v. Swaving CA4/3

Filed 12/20/21 P. v. Swaving CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G060316

v. (Super. Ct. No. C-55809)

HANS JACQUEHENRI SWAVING, OPINIO N

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Gary S. Paer. Affirmed. Victoria H. Stafford, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

We appointed counsel to represent Hans Jacquehenri Swaving on appeal. Counsel filed a brief that set forth the facts of the case. Counsel did not argue against her client but advised the court she found no issues to argue on his behalf. Counsel filed a brief following the procedures outlined in People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). The court in Wende explained a Wende brief is one that sets forth a summary of proceedings and facts but raises no specific issues. Under these circumstances, the court must conduct an independent review of the entire record. When the appellant himself raises specific issues in a Wende proceeding, we must expressly address them in our opinion and explain why they fail. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 120, 124.) Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel did not provide the court with information as to any issues that might arguably support an appeal. Counsel only asked this court to conduct an independent review of the record pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436. We gave Swaving 30 days to file written argument on his own behalf, and he did. We will discuss his contentions anon. We have independently reviewed the record in accordance with our obligations under Anders and Kelly. We found no arguable issues on appeal. We affirm the postjudgment order. FACTS In 1987, a jury convicted Swaving of first degree murder with special circumstance findings he committed the murder during the commission of a burglary and a robbery and used a firearm. (People v. Swaving (June 30, 1989, G005901) [nonpub. opn.] (Swaving).) The jury also convicted him of two counts of attempted murder, second degree burglary, and robbery with firearm use. The trial court sentenced Swaving to a term of life without parole and concurrent sentences on the remaining counts.