P. v. Baker
Filed 5/23/08 P. v. Baker CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Shasta)
----
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DAVID WAYNE BAKER, Defendant and Appellant. | C055819 (Super. Ct. No. 02F6889) |
In 2002, defendant David Wayne Baker pled guilty to possessing methamphetamine for sale and admitted violating his probation in two other cases. The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on probation under conditions including that he serve 180 days in county jail.
In April 2003, defendant admitted violating the terms of his probation. The trial court revoked then reinstated probation on conditions including that defendant serve another 60 days in county jail.
In May 2003, defendant again violated probation. The trial court revoked probation, sentenced defendant to three years in state prison for the drug conviction, suspended execution of sentence, and reinstated probation on conditions including that defendant serve 30 days in jail consecutively to the sentence he was already serving for the probation violation in April 2003.
In August 2003, defendant violated his probation yet again. Before sentencing, he voluntarily entered a drug rehabilitation program. The trial court postponed sentencing to allow defendant to complete the 12-month program. When defendant completed the program, the court reinstated probation and extended it for another year.
In December 2006, defendant admitted violating his probation again. The trial court revoked probation, ordered execution of the previously imposed prison term of three years, and directed defendant to pay various fees and fines. Defendant was awarded 232 days of custody credit and 114 days of conduct credit for a total credit of 346 days.
Defendant appeals. We appointed counsel to represent him on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks us to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant.
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
The judgment is affirmed.
SCOTLAND, P.J.
We concur:
NICHOLSON , J.
CANTIL-SAKAUYE , J.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney referral.
Analysis and review provided by Vista Property line Lawyers.
