Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division 3 encourages counsel to continue to identify possible appellate issues in Wende briefs. Kent’s appointed counsel filed a brief under the procedures outlined in People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. In his brief, counsel summarized the “possible” legal issues with citations to the record and appropriate authority, but raised no specific issues and requested review of the record pursuant to Wende. The appellate court found no arguable issues, and affirmed the judgment. The opinion was published to encourage appointed counsel to continue to include “arguable but unmeritorious” issues in Wende briefs filed in this court. Appellate counsel’s identification of potential issues and citation of pertinent legal authority in the Wende brief aids the court its review of the record. [Editor’s Note: The court also noted that it was disagreeing with People v. Hernandez (July, 29, 2014, G049024) 228 Cal.App.4th 539, a recent decision by a panel from the same court, which suggested that appellate counsel should eliminate the practice of identifying “arguable but unmeritorious” issues in Wende briefs. The court subsequently granted rehearing in Hernandez after ADI filed a request for modification or withdrawal of the publication order. On September 4, 2014, the court filed an unpublished opinion in the case, removing its previous suggestion. CCAP Note: Counsel appointed to cases in the Third and Fifth District Courts of Appeal are reminded that these courts do not accept Wende briefs that list arguable but unmeritorious issues. (See Wende brief procedures for these courts, https://www.capcentral.org/criminal/wende/index.asp.)]