Filed 7/24/13 P. v. Sypho 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS 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 This opinion has not been certified for publication 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. 

KEVIN SYPHO, 

 Defendant and Appellant. 

 D063235 

 (Super. Ct. No. SCD240712) 

 APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Charles R. 

Gill and Michael T. Smyth, Judges. Affirmed. 

 Sarah Kleven McGann, by appointment of the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and 

Appellant. 

 No appearance for Respondent. 

 Kevin Sypho pled guilty to burglary in violation of Penal Code Section 459 and 

admitted he was convicted in 1982 of robbery, a strike prior in violation of Penal Code 

Sections 211, 667(b) through (i), 1170.12 and 668. The remaining charges and six prison 

priors were dismissed in return for a stipulated prison sentence of four years. The court 
2 

sentenced appellant to four years in state prison, awarded 68 days of custody credits and 

imposed the requisite fees, fines and victim restitution. 

STATEMENT OF FACTS 

 Sometime between January 2 and 3, 2012, defendant burglarized a church, using a 

rock to gain entry into the administrative building. Once inside, he damaged doors and 

windows, took property and ransacked the pastor's office. Blood found on window blinds 

in the pastor's office matched appellant's DNA. Upon arrest, appellant admitted to 

breaking into the church because he was "mad" at the congregation and the pastor and 

state he had stolen the items to sell for food and drugs. 

DISCUSSION 

 Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief but asks this court to review the 

record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to 

Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel refers to as possible, but not arguable 

issues: whether the trial court erred when it: (1) failed to strike appellant's 1982 strike 

prior; (2) imposed a criminal justice administration fee and a Penal Code section 1202.5 

fine without determining appellant's ability to pay; and (3) allowed the prosecution to 

amend the information, over his objection, to add a grand theft charge (Pen. Code § 487, 
3 

subd. (a)).1 

 We granted Sypho permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not 

responded. 

 A review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and 

Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, including the possible issues referred to by 

appellate counsel, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issue. Competent 

counsel has represented Sypho on appeal. 

DISPOSITION 

 The judgment is affirmed. 

HALLER, J. 

WE CONCUR: 

BENKE, Acting P. J. 

NARES, J. 

 

1 Because the trial court denied Sypho's request for a certificate of probable cause, 

the issues set forth by appellant counsel are not even "possible issues" in light of the 

procedural posture of the case. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5; People v. Manriquez (1993) 18 

Cal.App.4th 1167, 1170.)