From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Martinez

California Court of Appeals, Third District, Butte
Apr 1, 2009
No. C060023 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 1, 2009)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ERIK JASON MARTINEZ, Defendant and Appellant. C060023 California Court of Appeal, Third District, Butte April 1, 2009

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Super. Ct. No. CM026912

CANTIL-SAKAUYE, J.

This is an appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). In June 2007, a parole search of defendant Erik Jason Martinez revealed a pocket knife and a bag containing 0.9 grams of methamphetamine. Defendant entered a no contest plea to possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) and admitted a prior prison term (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)) in exchange for dismissal of another prior prison term allegation with a waiver pursuant to People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754. The court suspended imposition of sentence and granted Proposition 36 probation.

Defendant admitted that he violated probation by failing to report to Behavioral Health Group in July 2007. He was continued on probation. Defendant admitted that he again violated probation by failing to submit a urine sample in accordance with the testing schedule. He was continued on probation. He admitted a third violation of probation when he terminated his participation in the residential treatment program without permission. The court revoked Proposition 36 probation.

Having waived past custody credits, defendant was continued on probation for five years under drug court conditions. He violated probation when he committed a new offense (Pen. Code, § 148). The court continued defendant on probation. He again violated probation when he terminated his participation in residential drug treatment. The court continued defendant on probation.

In July 2008, defendant was told by his probation officer to have no contact with N. H., who was on formal probation. Later in July 2008, defendant contacted N. H. at a AA/NA function and they left together. Defendant admitted that he violated probation by violating a direct order of the probation officer to have no contact with N. H.

The court sentenced defendant to state prison for the midterm of two years for the underlying offense plus one year for the prior prison term, awarded a total of 91 days of presentence custody credit, and imposed various fees and fines. Defendant appeals. His request for a certificate of probable cause (Pen. Code, § 1237.5) was denied.

We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening Wende brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this 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 elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: RAYE, Acting P. J., BUTZ, J.


Summaries of

People v. Martinez

California Court of Appeals, Third District, Butte
Apr 1, 2009
No. C060023 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 1, 2009)
Case details for

People v. Martinez

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ERIK JASON MARTINEZ, Defendant…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Third District, Butte

Date published: Apr 1, 2009

Citations

No. C060023 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 1, 2009)