From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Wiggins

California Court of Appeals, Sixth District
Jul 17, 2009
No. H033578 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 17, 2009)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. PAUL CRAIG WIGGINS, Defendant and Appellant. H033578 California Court of Appeal, Sixth District July 17, 2009

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. CC808186

Mihara, J.

In June 2002, defendant Paul Craig Wiggins was charged by complaint with possession of cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)) and possession of marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11357, subd. (b)). The record contains no description of the facts of his offenses. In November 2002, he waived his rights and pleaded guilty to both counts. In January 2003, defendant was placed on Proposition 36 probation for two years.

In August 2003, the court found defendant in violation of his probation and reinstated probation. In May 2004, the court found defendant in violation of his probation and revoked probation. In August 2004, the court reinstated probation. In December 2004, the court modified defendant’s probation to extend it to August 20, 2005.

In April 2005, defendant’s probation was revoked, modified, and reinstated. In June 2005, defendant’s probation was modified to extend it to December 30, 2005. In November 2005, defendant’s probation was modified to extend it to April 30, 2006. In December 2005, defendant’s probation was revoked. In April 2006, defendant’s probation was modified to extend it to September 30, 2006 and reinstated. In July 2006, defendant’s probation was revoked, reinstated, and modified to extend it to December 31, 2006. In September 2006, defendant’s probation was revoked. In October 2006, defendant’s probation was modified to extend it to March 30, 2007 and reinstated. In November 2006, defendant’s probation was again modified.

In February 2007, defendant’s probation was modified to extend it to December 31, 2007. In April 2007, defendant’s probation was revoked. In September 2007, defendant’s probation was modified and reinstated. In December 2007, defendant’s probation was modified to extend it to June 30, 2008.

In May 2008, defendant’s probation was modified and extended to August 30, 2008. In June 2008, defendant was charged by complaint with possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) and possession of controlled substance paraphernalia (Health & Saf. Code, § 11364) after these items were found in his vehicle during a probation search. In June 2008, defendant pleaded guilty to both counts, but he withdrew his pleas a few days later. His probation in the 2002 case was revoked in June 2008. In July 2008, defendant entered no contest pleas to the 2008 charges. He was granted Proposition 36 probation on those counts and released. In August 2008, his probation was revoked in the 2008 case.

In September 2008, defendant admitted violating his probation in the 2002 case, and he was committed to state prison to serve the lower term of 16 months. He was given 738 days of presentence custody credit, and his sentence was deemed served. At the same time, defendant was found unamenable to treatment in the 2008 case. He was sentenced to 120 days in jail for the 2008 case, and his sentence was deemed served. Defendant filed timely notices of appeal challenging only his sentences in the 2002 and 2008 cases.

Appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which states the case and the facts but raises no issues. Defendant was notified of his right to submit written argument on his own behalf. Defendant has submitted a supplemental brief in which he states: “My argument I wish to submit for myself would be that I withdrew my plea back in September of 2008.” Although the record before us shows that defendant withdrew his June 2008 pleas to the 2008 offenses, it also demonstrates that he entered new pleas to those counts in July 2008. Nothing in the record before us indicates that defendant ever withdrew those July 2008 pleas.

Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we have reviewed the entire record and have concluded that there are no arguable issues on appeal.

The judgment is affirmed.

WE CONCUR: Bamattre-Manoukian, Acting P., Duffy, J.


Summaries of

People v. Wiggins

California Court of Appeals, Sixth District
Jul 17, 2009
No. H033578 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 17, 2009)
Case details for

People v. Wiggins

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. PAUL CRAIG WIGGINS, Defendant and…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Sixth District

Date published: Jul 17, 2009

Citations

No. H033578 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 17, 2009)