P. v. Carrillo-Robles
Filed 6/20/12 P. v. Carrillo-Robles CA1/5
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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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
FIRST
APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION
FIVE
and Respondent,
and Appellant.
A134269
(Sonoma County
Super. Ct. No.
MCR-387070)
Defendant Leobardo Carrillo-Robles
appeals a December 13, 2011 order reinstating his probation and ordering him to
serve a year in county jail after he was found to have violated his
probation. His counsel has advised that
examination of the record reveals no arguable
issues. (People v. Wende (1979)
25 Cal.3d 436.) Counsel has informed
defendant in writing that a Wende brief
was being filed and that defendant had the right to personally file a
days. No supplemental brief has been
filed. No arguable error is shown.
BACKGROUND
On November 7, 2001, pursuant to a
negotiated disposition, defendant pled no contest to
& Saf. Code, § 11379, subd. (a).)
(§ 11350, subd. (a)) was dismissed.
On December 20, he was placed on 36 months’ probation with various
conditions, including service of an eight-month county jail term.
In June 2002, after defendant was
deported to Mexico, the court ordered his
probation summarily revoked and ordered issuance of a bench warrant in
the event that, during his probation period, he returned illegally to the
States.
On November 22, 2011, the probation
department filed a supplemental request to revoke defendant’s probation based
on his November 18 arrest for misdemeanor driving under the influence (DUI)
(Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a)), failure to obey all laws, complete
volunteer work, comply with the registration requirement (§ 11590) and
report regularly to the probation department.
On December 13, 2011, defendant
admitted violating his probation based on absconding from probation supervision
and the DUI arrest. Defendant also
agreed to a Johnson (
183) waiver.
title="">[2] The court reinstated probation and ordered
defendant to serve a year in county jail in addition to any time previously
served and ordered his probation to terminate unsuccessfully upon completion of
the sentence. The court denied
probation on the DUI case and imposed a concurrent 90-day jail term. The court properly awarded defendant 26 days
of actual presentence credit and 26 days of conduct credit.
Defendant was adequately represented
by counsel and no arguable error is demonstrated.
DISPOSITION
The sentencing order is affirmed.
SIMONS,
Acting P.J.
We concur.
NEEDHAM, J.
BRUINIERS, J.
name="_ftn1" title="">[1]
All undesignated section references are to the Health and Safety Code.
Pursuant to a Johnson waiver, “a
defendant . . . waive[s] custody credits . . . for jail time
previously served, in order to permit a sentencing court to reinstate probation
conditioned on service of an additional period of up to one year in county jail
for [a] new probation violation, without running afoul of [Penal Code] section
19.2’s one-year limitation on county jail terms. . . .†(People
v. Arnold (2004) 33 Cal.4th 294, 302.)
