People v. Gonzalez CA4/1
Opinion
Opinion
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The facts of the offense are fully set forth in our prior opinion. We will not repeat them here.
DISCUSSION
As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks the court to review the record for error. To assist the court in its review, and in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel
2 has identified the following possible issues that were considered in evaluating the potential merits of this appeal: 1. Did Gonzalez state a valid prima facie case for relief under section 1170.95? 2. Do any of the numerous cases under section 1170.95 that are currently on review before the California Supreme Court provide a basis for relief for Gonzalez? 3. Is section 1170.95 unconstitutional? 4. Was there sufficient evidence that Gonzalez was the shooter? 5. Was there any substantial evidence that Gonzalez was convicted under a theory of aiding and abetting or the natural and probable consequences doctrine? We have reviewed the entire record as required by Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Gonzalez on this appeal.