Opinion
B262330
07-30-2015
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JACOB KAFER, Defendant and Appellant.
California Appellate Project, Jonathan B. Steiner, Executive Director, and Richard B. Lennon, Staff Attorney, under appointments by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 5PH00075) APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Jacqueline Lewis, Judge. Affirmed. California Appellate Project, Jonathan B. Steiner, Executive Director, and Richard B. Lennon, Staff Attorney, under appointments by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
____________________
A parole revocation report alleged that appellant Jacob Kafer violated parole by absconding, disabling his global positioning system (GPS) device, and failing to register pursuant to Penal Code section 290. After a formal revocation hearing, the court revoked and reinstated parole, with the modification that Kafer serve 180 days in county jail, with credit for 43 days in custody and an additional 43 days of good time/work time credit. Kafer filed a timely notice of appeal.
This court appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. On June 17, 2015, appointed counsel filed a brief raising no issues, asking this court to independently review the record for arguable appellate contentions under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Kafer was advised of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days. No supplemental brief has been filed by defendant.
We have completed our independent review of the record. There are no arguable contentions on appeal. The parole revocation was properly noticed in writing. Kafer was afforded a timely revocation hearing at which he was assisted by appointed counsel. Parole Agent Mike Daum testified that Kafer's GPS device stopped responding and remained inactive for a period of 11 days. Kafer did not report to the parole officer during that time. Kafer also failed to appear at the time of his scheduled appointment at the local police station to register pursuant to Penal Code section 290. Substantial evidence supports the order revoking parole, and the modification to the parole conditions was well within the sound discretion of the court.
The judgment is affirmed. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259.)
KRIEGLER, J. We concur:
MOSK, Acting P. J.
Judge of the Los Angeles County Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution. --------