Filed 9/22/26 P. v. Estrada 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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, D087122
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. SCE433060,
SCD307798)
v.
RAFAEL ESTRADA,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County,
Selena Dong Epley, Judge. Affirmed.
Ava R. Stralla, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for
Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.
Rafael Estrada entered into plea agreements which resolved two
pending cases. In case No. SCE433060, Estrada pleaded guilty to robbery
(Pen. Code, § 211) and admitted the use of a weapon. In case No. SCD307798
Estrada pleaded guilty to shoplifting.
Prior to sentencing, Estrada filed a motion to replace appointed
counsel. The court held a hearing and then denied the motion.
The court sentenced Estrada to a total term for both cases of four years
in prison. The charges that were not admitted were dismissed as part of the
plea agreement.
Estrada fled a timely notice of appeal and obtained a certificate of
probable cause.
Appellate counsel has filed a brief under the authority of 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 offered Estrada the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal, but
he has not responded and has not filed any supplemental briefing.
This case follows guilty pleas in two cases with stipulated sentences.
We will not include a statement of facts in this opinion.
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 of the record, counsel has identified three possible issues that were
considered in evaluating the potential merits of this appeal.
Does the record show that Estrada was able to hear the court’s
questions about Estrada’s understanding of the trial rights he waived in
pleading guilty?
Did the court properly deny the motion to replace appointed counsel?
Did the court properly impose various fees and fines as part of the
sentence? We have independently reviewed the record for error as required
by Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any arguable issues for
reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Estada in this
appeal.
2
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
HUFFMAN, J.*
WE CONCUR:
CASTILLO, Acting P. J.
BERMÚDEZ, 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