From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Smith

California Court of Appeals, Third District, Butte
Apr 23, 2008
No. C055410 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 23, 2008)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. STEPHANIE SUZANNE SMITH, Defendant and Appellant. C055410 California Court of Appeal, Third District, Butte April 23, 2008

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Super. Ct. No. CM025230

ROBIE, J.

During a probation search of another person’s residence, officers found a glass smoking pipe loaded with marijuana, 1.02 grams of marijuana in a wooden box, 1.11 grams of methamphetamine in two plastic baggies, and a switchblade knife, all belonging to defendant Stephanie Suzanne Smith. Defendant pled no contest to possession of methamphetamine, possession of drug paraphernalia, and misdemeanor possession of marijuana. The court imposed three years’ formal probation pursuant to Proposition 36 and fines totaling $1,060.

On September 21, 2006, defendant admitted violating her probation, which the court reinstated. The court reinstated probation again after defendant admitted a second probation violation on October 19, 2006. The court remanded defendant to custody on December 7, 2006, but released her to a residential drug treatment program in lieu of jail. She completed the 30-day program on January 7, 2008.

Then defendant admitted her third violation. The court revoked her probation, imposed a prison sentence of the midterm of two years, suspended proceedings, imposed various fines and fees, and committed defendant to the California Rehabilitation Center (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 3051).

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

We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening 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. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) 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: SCOTLAND P.J., SIMS, J.


Summaries of

People v. Smith

California Court of Appeals, Third District, Butte
Apr 23, 2008
No. C055410 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 23, 2008)
Case details for

People v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. STEPHANIE SUZANNE SMITH…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Third District, Butte

Date published: Apr 23, 2008

Citations

No. C055410 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 23, 2008)