P. v. Humphries
On December 13, 2011, appellant Steven G. Humphries was convicted, following his plea of no contest, of two felonies: attempting by threats or violence to deter an executive officer from performing a lawful duty (Pen. Code, § 69),[1] and possession of methamphetamine for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378). He admitted that he had suffered two prior terms of imprisonment arising from felony convictions (§ 667.5, subd. (b)), making him presumptively ineligible for probation under section 1203, subdivision (e)(4). As part of the plea agreement, the prosecution moved to dismiss a charge of transportation, selling or furnishing methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379, subd. (a)), and an allegation that Humphries had suffered a prior “strike†conviction for burglary (§ 667, subds. (b)–(i)). Humphries was advised that the maximum possible sentence he could receive was five years, eight months. The court denied probation, finding that this was not an unusual case that would overcome Humphries’s presumptive ineligibility. The court found that, even if Humphries had been eligible for probation, he would not be a suitable candidate for probation given his numerous prior convictions and his poor prior performance on probation and parole. The court sentenced Humphries to prison for the maximum term of five years, eight months: imposing the three-year upper term for possession of methamphetamine for sale; an eight-month consecutive term for resisting an executive officer; and one consecutive year for each the two prior prison terms Humphries had served. Humphries was awarded 140 days of presentence credits. Among other fines and fees, the court ordered a $1,200 restitution fine and a $1,200 parole revocation restitution fine.
A timely notice of appeal was filed on February 16, 2012. The notice of appeal recites that it is based on “the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea that do not affect the validity of the plea.†(Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b).) No certificate of probable cause (§ 1237.5), permitting pursuit of other issues, was requested.
Comments on P. v. Humphries