Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from postjudgment orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Nos. MA048425, MA042834, Kathleen Blanchard, Judge.
Richard L. Fitzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
PERLUSS, P. J.
Karie Britt Johnson was charged by criminal complaint filed on March 2, 2010 with felony possession of a controlled substance (methamphetamine) (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) in Los Angeles Superior Court case No. MA048425. On March 2, 2010 Johnson, assisted by counsel, waived her constitutional rights and pleaded guilty to the charge.
Johnson had suffered a prior conviction for the same offense. In July 2008 she had pleaded guilty to methamphetamine possession, but entry of judgment was deferred for 18 months to allow Johnson to complete a drug education program (Pen. Code, § 1000.2) (Los Angeles Superior Court case No. MA042834). On several occasions in 2009 the trial court found Johnson’s performance on diversion unsatisfactory, excluded her from the deferred-entry-of-judgment program and reinstituted criminal proceedings against her. Each time, however, the court subsequently reinstated Johnson on the deferred-entry-of-judgment program. On November 25, 2009 the court ordered Johnson to return for a progress report on January 6, 2010, anticipating she would pay fees owed and perform court-ordered community service. When Johnson failed to appear on January 6, 2010, the court terminated her from the deferred-entry-of-judgment program, reinstated criminal proceedings and issued a bench warrant for her arrest.
At a March 22, 2010 hearing, the trial court placed Johnson on one year of formal probation for her two possession offenses pursuant to Penal Code section 1210.1 (Proposition 36).
On July 7, 2010 the trial court revoked and reinstated Proposition 36 probation after Johnson admitted she had violated the terms of her probation by failing to appear with proof of enrollment in the treatment program in Los Angeles Superior Court case No. MA042834. The court set a hearing date of August 25, 2010 for a progress report. Johnson failed to appear on that date, and the court summarily revoked and terminated her Proposition 36 probation and once again issued a bench warrant for her arrest.
Following a contested probation violation hearing on November 16, 2010, the trial court found Johnson had violated her probation in both cases for twice failing to appear in court as ordered and further found, by her conduct, Johnson was not amenable to treatment for substance abuse pursuant to People v. Guzman (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 341. The court terminated Proposition 36 probation in both cases. In Los Angeles Superior Court case No. MA042834, the court suspended imposition of sentence and placed Johnson on three years of formal probation on condition she serve 180 days in county jail, 90 of which could be served in a residential treatment facility. Johnson received presentence custody credit of 37 days (25 actual days and 12 days of conduct credit). The court ordered Johnson to pay a $40 security assessment, a $30 criminal assessment, a $50 lab fee, a $150 drug program fee and a $200 restitution fine. In Los Angeles Superior Court case No. MA048425, the court suspended imposition of sentence and placed Johnson on three years of formal probation on the same terms and conditions, but imposed no jail time.
Johnson filed notices of appeal in both cases, challenging the revocation of her Proposition 36 probation. We appointed counsel to represent her on appeal.
After an examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised. On March 17, 2011 we advised Johnson she had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues she wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied Johnson’s attorney has fully complied with the responsibilities of counsel and no arguable issues exist. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284 [120 S.Ct. 746, 145 L.Ed.2d 756]; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 112-113; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
The orders are affirmed.
We concur: WOODS, J., JACKSON, J.