People v. Williams CA2/7

DISCUSSION

We appointed counsel to represent Williams in this appeal. After reviewing the record, counsel filed a brief raising no issues and requesting our independent review of the record. Counsel also wrote Williams, explained his evaluation of the record on appeal, and informed Williams that he had the right to file a supplemental brief. Counsel also sent Williams the record on appeal and a copy of the brief. On March 29, 2024, this court also notified Williams that he could submit within 30 days a

See People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497, 529-530 (“we conclude that section 1385(a) does permit a court acting on its own motion to strike prior felony conviction allegations in cases brought under the Three Strikes law”).

3 supplemental brief or letter stating any grounds for an appeal, contentions, or arguments he wanted us to consider. We have received no response from Williams. We have examined the record and are satisfied appellate counsel for Williams has complied with counsel’s responsibilities and there are no arguable issues. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 118- 119; People v. Wende (1979)…