People v. Helmholtz CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 24, 2024E081838California598 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

In 2019, the Riverside County District Attorney petitioned to have Helmholtz

designated a sexually violent predator under Welfare and Institutions Code section 6600,

et seq.1 The court held a hearing under section 6602 in November 2019 and found there

was probable cause to believe the allegations in the petition true.

Helmholtz waived his right to a jury trial, and the court held the trial on the

petition beginning in March 2023 and ending in July of the same year. The court issued

its written decision on July 31, 2023, finding the allegations in the petition true.

ANALYSIS

On Helmholtz’s request, we appointed counsel to represent him on appeal.

Counsel filed a brief declaring they found no arguably meritorious issues to appeal,

setting out a statement of the case, and asking us to conduct an independent review of the

record.

When appealing from a postconviction order a defendant does not have a

constitutional right to independent review under Anders/Wende if appellate counsel

cannot identify any arguable issues. (People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216, 227,

1 Unlabeled statutory citations refer to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

2 231…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.