From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Martin

California Court of Appeals, Third District, Butte
Jan 23, 2009
No. C057524 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 23, 2009)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. GAY LYNN MARTIN, Defendant and Appellant. C057524 California Court of Appeal, Third District, Butte January 23, 2009

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Super. Ct. No. CM025369

HULL , J.

On November 5, 2001, Modesto police officers investigated a Modesto residence in response to reports of drug activity. Officers performed a welfare check on the residence and found paraphernalia used in the manufacture of methamphetamine. Among the people in the residence were defendant Gay Lynn Martin and her three children, ages eight, three, and one. The eight-year-old child said when the adults were home they would do “really cool” experiments in the garage such as “a big glass pot with white stuff in it and it was bubbling.”

Defendant pleaded no contest to felony child endangerment (Pen. Code, § 273a, subd. (a)) in Stanislaus County case No. 1028796 and was placed on probation. On April 21, 2004, defendant admitted violating probation. Her probation was extended to June 2, 2006, and the court ordered her to serve 45 days in jail with 12 days of credit.

Defendant admitted violating her probation again on February 6, 2006. The court reimposed probation, extended it to September 28, 2007, and ordered her to serve 90 days in jail with 12 days of credit.

Defendant moved to Butte County and the case was transferred to that county pursuant to Penal Code section 1203.9. The Butte County court continued her probation under the same conditions as before with added conditions, including her enrolling and successfully completing a domestic violence class.

Defendant admitted to violating her probation on September 14, 2007, after being arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol. The court subsequently revoked probation, sentenced defendant to a middle term of four years, imposed various fines and fees, and awarded 134 days of presentence credit (90 days custody and 44 days conduct).

Having failed to obtain a certificate of probable cause, defendant appeals.

During the pendency of the appeal, appellate counsel filed a motion with the trial court to correct the award of presentence credit. (Pen. Code, § 1237.1.) The trial court granted the motion, modifying the sentence to reflect an award of 189 days of credit (127 days custody and 62 days conduct) and prepared an amended abstract of judgment reflecting the modification.

We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and, pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, requesting the court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. 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 have elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant.

We have undertaken an independent examination of the entire record in this case and have found no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: SCOTLAND , P. J., DAVIS , J.


Summaries of

People v. Martin

California Court of Appeals, Third District, Butte
Jan 23, 2009
No. C057524 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 23, 2009)
Case details for

People v. Martin

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. GAY LYNN MARTIN, Defendant and…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Third District, Butte

Date published: Jan 23, 2009

Citations

No. C057524 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 23, 2009)