Filed 9/10/26 P. v. Arthur 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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, D087819
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. SCE437741)
v.
JOSHUA ARTHUR,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County,
Kathleen M. Lewis, Judge. Affirmed.
Lynelle K. Hee, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for
Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.
Joshua Arthur entered into a plea agreement in which he pleaded
guilty to one count of assault with force likely to cause great bodily injury
(Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4)). The remaining charges and allegations were
dismissed. The court granted formal probation subject to a 365-day jail
sentence as well as other conditions.
Arthur filed a notice of appeal the same day.
Appellate counsel has filed a brief under the guidelines specified in
People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) indicating counsel has not been
able to identify any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the
court to independently review the record for error as mandated by Wende.
We advised Arthur he could file his own brief on appeal. Arthur has not
responded or submitted any supplemental brief.
This guilty plea was based on a stipulated statement that he committed
the felony assault.
DISCUSSION
As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks
the court to independently review the record for error. To assist the court in
its review and incompliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738
(Anders), counsel has identified two possible issues that were considered in
evaluating the potential merits of this appeal: whether Arthur was advised
of and knowingly waived his trial rights, and whether Arthur was sentenced
in accordance with the plea agreement.
We have independently reviewed the record for error. We have not
discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel
has represented Arthur in this appeal.
2
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
HUFFMAN, J.*
WE CONCUR:
MCCONNELL, P. J.
BUCHANAN, J.
* Retired Associate Justice of the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate
District, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the
California Constitution.
3