Filed 2/18/16 P. v. Williams CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for 

publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication

or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

MARTY JAY WILLIAMS,

Defendant and Appellant.

F069352

(Super. Ct. No. BF147597A)

OPINION

THE COURT*

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. John R. 

Brownlee, Judge.

Robert Navarro, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and 

Appellant.

Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and 

Respondent.

-ooOoo-

 

* Before Gomes, Acting P.J., Poochigian, J. and Smith, J.
2

Appellant Marty Jay Williams appeals from a court finding that he violated his 

probation in case No. BF147597A. Following independent review of the record pursuant 

to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On March 27, 2013, at approximately 7:49 p.m., officers responding to a report of 

people loitering arrived at a location on Martin Luther King Boulevard in Bakersfield, 

California, where five gang members, including Williams, were huddled in a circle. The 

gang members then began walking away from each other attempting to leave. Officers 

conducted a parole search of Williams and found a baggie containing marijuana. The 

officers searched the area where the suspects had been gathered in a circle and found a 

baggie containing a brick of marijuana weighing 164 grams. The marijuana obtained 

from Williams appeared to have come from the brick. 

On March 29, 2013, the district attorney filed a complaint charging Williams with 

possession for sale of marijuana, a gang enhancement (Pen. Code, § 186.22, subd. 

(b)(1))1, a serious felony enhancement (§ 1192.7, subd. (c)(28)), three prior prison term 

enhancements (§ 667.5, subd. (b)), and with having a prior conviction within the meaning 

of the three strikes law (§ 667, subds. (b)-(i)). 

On April 12, 2013, Williams pled no contest to possession for sale of marijuana 

and admitted the prior strike conviction allegations in exchange for the dismissal of the 

remaining enhancements, an indication by the court that it would strike his prior strike 

conviction, and a grant of felony probation. 

On May 10, 2013, per his negotiated plea, the court struck Williams’s prior strike 

conviction, suspended imposition of sentence, and placed Williams on felony probation 

for three years, conditioned on Williams serving 90 days in local custody. 

 

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
3

On October 22, 2013, Williams was arraigned on a probation violation and the 

court revoked his probation. 

At a hearing on February 26, 2014, the court found that Williams violated his 

probation based on his conviction of attempted voluntary manslaughter (§§ 664/192, 

subd. (a)) and two counts of assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)) in case 

No. BF151132B. 

On April 15, 2014, the court sentenced Williams to the aggravated term of three 

years, which it ran concurrent to an aggregate term of 23 years Williams received in case 

No. BF151132B. 

Williams’s appellate counsel has filed a brief that summarizes the facts, with 

citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the 

record. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Except for asking for an extension of 

time that was granted, Williams has not filed a response to this court’s invitation to 

submit additional briefing.

Following an independent review of the record, we find that no reasonably 

arguable factual or legal issues exist.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.