P. v. Garrison
Filed 8/15/13 P. v. Garrison CA2/5
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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115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
SECOND
APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION
FIVE
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
LAVELLE SHUNTEL GARRISON,
Defendant and Appellant.
B247234
(Los Angeles
County
Super. Ct.
No. YA082199)
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior
Court of
County, Mark S. Arnold, Judge.
Affirmed.
Steven A.
Brody, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No
appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Appellant
Lavelle Shuntel Garrison pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine, (Health
& Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) pursuant to a negotiated plea
agreement. The trial court suspended
imposition of sentence and placed appellant on formal probation for a period of
686 days with the first 321 days in county jail.
was that he obey all laws.
On December 26, 2012, a motion to
revoke probation was filed. On February 19, 2013, a hearing was held
pursuant to People v.
probation, revoked probation, and imposed a term of two years in
FACTS
On December 14, 2012, appellant and his
girlfriend Patricia Medina, were on their way to the beach when an argument
ensued. Appellant grabbed Medina
by her neck and said he wanted to kill her.
Someone flagged down the police. Medina
told police officers about the incident, and also told them appellant had been
violent toward her before.
Appellant
testified at the probation revocation hearing.
He denied he choked Medina. Appellant said Medina
had hit him on many occasions.
DISCUSSION
Appellant filed a timely
counsel to represent him on appeal.
Appellant's counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to
independently review the record on appeal to determine whether any
On June 27, 2013, we advised appellant he had 30 days in
which to personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to
consider. No response has been received
to date.
We have
examined the entire record and are satisfied appellant's attorney has fully
complied with his responsibilities and no arguable issues exist. (People
v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)
DISPOSITION
The
judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE
PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
KUMAR,
J.
We concur:
MOSK,
Acting P.J.
KRIEGLER,
J.
had a total of 321 days of custody credit.
Thus, he had one year of probation remaining at the time of sentencing.
Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the
California Constitution.
