Filed 6/21/17 P. v. Sharif 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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.

HAMZA M. SHARIF,

Defendant and Appellant.
D071100



(Super. Ct. No. SCD221671)

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, David J. Danielsen, Judge. Affirmed.
Russell S. Babcock, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
In 2010, Hamza Sharif pleaded guilty to one count of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) and admitted two serious/violent felony prior convictions (§ 667, subds. (b)-(i)). Sharif was ultimately sentenced to a determinate term of 10 years in prison.
Apparently, Sharif petitioned for relief under Proposition 47 (§ 1170.18, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act). We have a copy of the order, dated May 29, 2015, denying the petition for reclassification of Sharif's robbery conviction.
In June 2016, Sharif filed a petition to recall his sentence under section 1170, subdivision (d), and section 1170.18. The record does not contain the trial court's response to the request. The record does contain Sharif's notice of appeal from a purported order of June 17, 2016. Appellate counsel represents this court's docket reflects a trial court judgment dated May 29, 2016. Such judgment is not contained in the record on appeal. We do note, however, the document that is in the record is dated May 29, 2015.
Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), indicating counsel has not been able to identify any arguable issue for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered Sharif the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal, but he has not responded.
DISCUSSION
As we have observed, counsel has not identified any arguable issue for reversal on appeal. We have reviewed the entire record as mandated by Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Sharif on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The order denying Sharif's requests for recall of his sentence under sections 1170, subdivision (d) and section 1170.18 is affirmed.



HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.

WE CONCUR:




HALLER, J.




AARON, J.