Opinion
F075463
02-13-2018
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CHANCE RANDEL WARNOCK, Defendant and Appellant.
Allan E. Junker, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. VCF300095)
OPINION
THE COURT APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tulare County. Joseph A. Kalashian, Judge. (Retired Judge of the Tulare County Sup. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.) Allan E. Junker, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Before Poochigian, Acting P.J., Franson, J. and Meehan, J.
-ooOoo-
Appellant Chance Randel Warnock appeals from the imposition of a sentence of 120 days in custody following an admission of violation of probation.
Appointed counsel for appellant asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We sent a letter to appellant advising him of his 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 appellant. Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to appellant, we affirm the judgment.
We provide the following brief description of the factual and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)
STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS
On May 15, 2014, the Tulare County District Attorney's Office filed a complaint alleging that on February 13, 2014, appellant vandalized a vehicle with an amount of damage exceeding $400, a violation of Penal Code section 594, subdivision (a).
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise noted. --------
On August 20, 2014, appellant pleaded no contest to one count of vandalism, a violation of section 594, subdivision (a). On that same date, the trial court suspended imposition of sentence, placed appellant on three years formal probation, and ordered him to serve nine days in custody with credit for time served. The trial court ordered appellant to pay $2,792.37 victim restitution, and imposed a $330 restitution fine (§ 1202.4), a stayed $330 probation revocation fine (§ 1202.44), a $40 court operations assessment fee (§ 1465.8) and a $30 criminal conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373).
On October 15, 2015, the probation officer declared that appellant failed to report to probation, failed to report a change of address and failed to report to probation accounting services. On November 4, 2015, appellant admitted violating probation. The trial court revoked and reinstated probation on the same terms, and ordered appellant to serve 30 days in custody, with nine days of credit.
On March 15, 2016, the probation officer declared that appellant failed to report to probation, failed to report a change of address, failed to report to probation accounting services and failed to attend treatment. On April 25, 2016, appellant admitted violating probation. The trial court revoked and reinstated probation on the same terms, and ordered appellant to serve 60 days in custody, with six days of credit.
On June 9, 2016, the probation officer declared that appellant failed to complete treatment by leaving a WestCare facility on June 2, 2016, and failed to contact probation with an updated address. On June 30, 2016, appellant admitted violating probation. The trial court revoked and reinstated probation on the same terms, and ordered appellant to serve 120 days in custody, with 10 days of credit.
On December 13, 2016, the probation officer declared that appellant failed to report to probation, failed to report a change of address, and failed to report to probation accounting services. A probation department office memorandum further stated that appellant tested positive for THC on September 30, 2016. On January 12, 2017, appellant admitted violating probation. The trial court revoked and reinstated probation on the same terms, ordered appellant to serve 120 days in custody, with eight days of credit, and ordered appellant to pay $100 in attorney's fees pursuant to section 987.8.
On March 8, 2017, appellant pleaded guilty to a public intoxication charge in another case, which constituted a violation of probation in the instant case. The trial court readmitted appellant to probation under the original terms and conditions, and ordered appellant to serve 120 days in custody, with 29 days of credit.
On April 6, 2017, appellant timely filed a notice of appeal based on the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea that do not affect the validity of the plea.
Our review of the entire record has revealed no arguable issues on appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.