Filed 5/18/17 P. v. Robles 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

MIGUEL ANGEL ROBLES ,

Defendant and Appellant.
D069815



(Super. Ct. No. SCD260448)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Lorna A. Alksne, Judge. Affirmed.

Sheila O'Connor, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
A jury found Miguel Angel Robles guilty of two counts of committing a lewd act on a child under the age of 14 (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a),) with the further finding that Robles had substantial sexual conduct with the victim. (§ 1203.066, subd. (a)(8).) The trial court sentenced Robles to an eight-year prison term.
Appointed appellate counsel filed a brief presenting no argument for reversal, but inviting this court to review the record for error in accordance with People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Robles has not responded to our invitation to file a supplemental brief. After having independently reviewed the entire record for error as required by Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders) and Wende, we affirm.
I.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Robles helped out at a daycare that was operated by his girlfriend's mother. When Jane Doe was eight years old, she disclosed to her mother that Robles had touched her private parts on two occasions while she attended the daycare — once in the living room and once in a car. She later made the same disclosure to the police and to a forensic interviewer. Robles was interviewed by police and admitted that he had touched Jane Doe on the vagina three or four times to explain that she should not let people touch her there.
A complaint charged Robles with two counts of committing a lewd act on a child under the age of 14. (§ 288, subd. (a).) At the preliminary hearing, Jane Doe testified about a third touching, which she stated occurred in a bedroom. Based on that testimony, a third lewd act count was added to the information. (§ 288, subd. (a).)
At trial, Jane Doe testified that Robles touched her vagina, over her clothes, three separate times: in the living room, in the car, and in the bedroom. She stated that during the touching in the bedroom, three other adults were present, but they had their eyes closed. Robles testified in his own defense and denied ever touching Jane Doe in an inappropriate manner.
The jury found Robles guilty on two of the counts (§ 288, subd. (a)), and further found that Robles had substantial sexual conduct as to both counts (§ 1203.066, subd. (a)(8)). However, the jury was unable to reach a verdict on the third count, which alleged the lewd act occurring in the bedroom, and the People moved to dismiss that count. The trial court imposed an eight-year prison sentence.
Robles filed a notice of appeal from the judgment.
II.
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief summarizing the facts and proceedings in the trial court. Counsel presented no argument for reversal but invited this court to review the record for error in accordance with Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.
Counsel has identified the following issues that "might arguably support the appeal" (Anders, supra, 386 U.S. at p. 744): (1) whether sufficient evidence exists to prove that Robles committed the lewd acts with specific intent to arouse himself or the victim; (2) whether the trial court properly instructed on the element of specific intent to arouse; and (3) whether the court properly excluded evidence regarding sexual abuse of one of Jane Doe's family members.
After we received counsel's brief, we gave Robles an opportunity to file a supplemental brief, but Robles did not respond.
A review of the record pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, and Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738, including the issues suggested by counsel, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issue. Robles has been adequately represented by counsel on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.




BENKE, J.

WE CONCUR:




MCCONNELL, P. J.




AARON, J.