From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Velasco

California Court of Appeals, Sixth District
Jul 12, 2011
No. H036005 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 12, 2011)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. PEDRO VELASCO, Defendant and Appellant. H036005 California Court of Appeal, Sixth District July 12, 2011

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Monterey County Super. Ct. No. SS091792

RUSHING, P.J.

Officers from the Salinas Gang Task Force attempted to stop a vehicle engaged in suspicious behavior. Although the officers activated their emergency lights, the car did not come to an immediate stop. When the car did stop, the passenger jumped out of the vehicle and ran off. He was never located. The officers detained defendant because he was driving the car without a license. A search of the car revealed a loaded handgun magazine containing six.40 caliber rounds, a switchblade knife and an open beer. During the booking process, defendant identified himself as a Sureno gang member. The next day, a P. Beretta.40 semi-automatic pistol was retrieved in the yard of a home near where the defendant’s car had come to a stop. The gun had no record of ownership.

On October 6, 2009, appellant pleaded no contest to one felony count of having a concealed firearm in a vehicle. (Pen. Code, § 12025, subd. (a)(1).) He also admitted a special gun allegation and a gang enhancement. (Pen. Code, § 186.22, subd. (b)(1).) The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on three years probation on the condition he serve 365 days in jail. The court imposed a number of probation conditions including a prohibition against association with gang members, a prohibition against wearing, displaying or possessing gang paraphernalia and required him to submit to searches. Finally, the court awarded defendant credit for time served of 128 days.

On May 24, 2010, the probation department filed a notice of violation of probation alleging that appellant had failed to report as directed. The trial court revoked probation on May 27, 2010, and issued a bench warrant because defendant failed to appear at the probation violation hearing. On May 28, 2010, defendant was again stopped by police during a routine traffic stop. He initially misidentified himself as Juan Lopez. From prior contacts, the officer recognized two of the three passengers as known gang members.

The third passenger cooperated with police and turned over defendant’s cell phone which was locked. However, defendant refused to provide officers with the unlocking code. On June 1, 2010, an additional notice of violation of probation was filed, alleging violation of Penal Code section 148.9 (giving false identification), association with gang members and failure to submit to search. In response to defendant filing a motion to suppress pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5, the district attorney moved to dismiss the misdemeanor false identification count. Defendant objected on the grounds that dismissing the count would preclude him from having his Penal Code section 1538.5 motion heard. The court granted the motion to dismiss the substantive offense and the motion to suppress was taken off calendar. The court went on to find that defendant had violated his probation as alleged in the petitions.

On August 27, 2010, the court revoked and terminated defendant’s probation and sentenced him to the upper term of three years for the substantive offense and the mid-term of three years for the enhancement. Defendant received credit for time served of 336 actual days plus 168 good and work credits. This timely appeal ensued.

On appeal, appointed counsel filed an opening brief which states the case and the facts but raises no specific issues. We notified defendant of his right to submit written argument in his own behalf within 30 days. Thirty days has elapsed and we have received nothing from the defendant. Pursuant to our obligation as set forth in People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we have reviewed the entire record on appeal. We conclude that there are no arguable issues. Therefore, we will affirm the judgment.

Disposition

The judgment is affirmed.

WE CONCUR: PREMO, J., ELIA, J.


Summaries of

People v. Velasco

California Court of Appeals, Sixth District
Jul 12, 2011
No. H036005 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 12, 2011)
Case details for

People v. Velasco

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. PEDRO VELASCO, Defendant and…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Sixth District

Date published: Jul 12, 2011

Citations

No. H036005 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 12, 2011)