People v. Roberts CA4/1

DISCUSSION

Roberts’s appointed appellate counsel filed a brief under the authority of Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738, setting forth

3 a statement of the case and a summary of the facts and procedural history. Counsel raised no specific issues on appeal, arguing an Anders/Wende approach is appropriate. On November 24, 2025, we issued an order stating that Roberts’s counsel had filed a brief identifying no arguable issues and granting Roberts 30 days to file a supplemental brief. On December 29, Roberts filed a letter in which he stated, among other things, that he is in remission and prepared to be released. He asserted he was not guilty of the underlying crime to which he pled guilty, in part because “nobody got hurt and nothing was missing or stolen from the residence.” The supplemental brief submitted by Roberts does not expressly set forth any specific argument for reversible error in the issuance of the extension order. But he appears to implicitly argue there is insufficient evidence to support his recommitment. In so arguing, he has the burden on appeal to show that substantial evidence does not support the order. “When a civil appeal…