Description: Sacramento, California criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with two counts of robbery.

A court found defendant guilty of two counts of robbery in which a firearm was used (Pen.Code, §§ 211, 12022.5) and sentenced him to prison for five years.

* * *

Legal issue Does the procedure followed by legal counsel, who remained active in the case but filed a brief raising no specific issues, satisfy the standards set forth in Anders v. California and People v. Feggans?
Headnote

1. CRIMINAL LAW. APPELLATE REVIEW. The case explores the legal question of whether the proceedings following the trial court's guilty verdict satisfied the standards set forth in Anders v. California and People v. Feggans, specifically focusing on the requirement for counsel to act as an active advocate and present any possible arguable issues to assist the appellate court in the review.

2. CRIMINAL LAW. REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENT DEFENDANTS ON APPEAL. The case scrutinizes the propriety of a defendant's appointed counsel filing a brief that does not raise any specific issues, instead urging the court to review the entire case record for potential issues, and the consequences of such action on the legal representation of the defendant.

3. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. RIGHT TO FAIR PROCESS AND EQUALITY UNDER FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT. The case underlines the requirement for substantial equality and fair process in handling appeals by indigent defendants, and the constitutional inadequacy of the no-merit letter procedure in meeting this requirement.

4. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. ROLE OF APPELLATE COUNSEL IN COUNSEL-ADVOCATE MODEL. The judgment discusses the obligations of the appellate counsel under the counsel-advocate model outlined by the Supreme Court in Anders v. California, emphasizing the need for counsel to act as an advocate, present potential valid legal points to the court, and allow the indigent defendant to present additional points.
Key Paragraphs

Highlight Key Paragraphs

“...We conclude that Anders requires the court to conduct a review of the entire record whenever appointed counsel submits a brief which raises no specific issues or describes the appeal as frivolous.,This obligation is triggered by the receipt of such a brief from counsel and does not depend on the subsequent receipt of a brief from the defendant personally.,We recognize that under this rule counsel may ultimately be able to secure a more complete review for his client when he cannot find any arguable issues than when he raises specific issues, for a review of the entire record is not necessarily required in the latter situation....”

Outcome: Affirmed

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: