Opinion
D060311
05-16-2012
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. FRANCISCO GARCIA, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
(Super. Ct. No. SCN275967-2)
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Kimberlee A. Lagotta, Judge. Affirmed.
Appellant Francisco Garcia pled guilty to forgery (Pen. Code, § 470, subd. (d)) and the court dismissed the remaining charges. !(CT 5-7)! The court placed appellant on formal probation and ordered him to serve 90 days in county jail and to comply with numerous standard terms and conditions of probation. !(CT 29)!
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The facts are taken from the probation report.
In February 2010, a blank check was taken without consent from the First American Law Center in Oceanside. It was later cashed in Chula Vista for $2,000 by codefendant Patricia Alvarez, who is not a party to this appeal. When contacted by the police, Alvarez stated that her friend Garcia, who was employed by the First American Law Center, asked her to cash the check and she complied. According to Alvarez, when Garcia gave her the check, it was already made out in her name. !(Prob. Rpt., p. 2)!
At sentencing in May 2011, the court imposed several probation conditions, including that Garcia "not use or possess any controlled substance without a valid prescription . . . ." !(CT 34; 2 Aug. RT 12-13)! Appellant accepted all of the terms and conditions of probation without objection. !(2 RT 23)!
In July 2011, appellant filed a motion asking the court to modify the condition of probation concerning drugs by allowing him to use marijuana for medical purposes. The court denied the motion, finding the medical documentation supporting the request was lacking. Additionally, the court concluded that because of Garcia's history of addictive behavior, the use of medical marijuana would interfere with Garcia's "successful performance on probation." !(July 27 RT 6, 7)!
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief setting forth evidence in the superior court. Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks that this court review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel refers to as possible, but not arguable, issues: (1) whether an order denying a motion to modify probation is appealable; (2) whether the trial court had jurisdiction to modify probation where there were no changed circumstances; and (3) whether the court abused its discretion in denying appellant's motion to modify his probation terms.
We granted Garcia permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not responded.
DISPOSITION
A review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal. 3d 436 and Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, including the possible issues referred to by appellate counsel, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issues. Competent counsel has represented Garcia on this appeal.
The judgment is affirmed.
HALLER, J. WE CONCUR: BENKE, Acting P.J. O'ROURKE, J.