Opinion
A152764
06-19-2018
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. KELISHA ALVAREZ, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Mendocino County Super. Ct. Nos. SCUKCRCR-16-88424, 17-89509)
Appellant Kelisha Alvarez appeals from sentencing in two separate matters that were part of a single disposition after her probation was revoked. Appellant's court-appointed counsel has filed a brief seeking our independent review of the record, pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, to determine whether there are any arguable issues for review. Defendant has also been informed of her right to file supplemental briefing, and she has not done so.
On December 11, 2016, the Ukiah police responded to a report from appellant about a theft. Appellant told the officer that her male friend had possession of her medical paperwork and wouldn't return it to her. The male friend, who was at the scene, denied taking appellant's paperwork, and accused her of kicking him, which appellant denied. Another witness nearby said that he saw appellant walk up and kick the male friend. Officers, with difficulty, handcuffed appellant and arrested her on an outstanding warrant and on suspicion of domestic violence. As she was being taken to the patrol car, appellant kicked the rear driver's side door of the car with such force that it left a dent in the door and caused about $980 in damage. Based on these facts, appellant was charged with felony vandalism (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (b)(1)) (the vandalism case). The case was resolved through a plea. Appellant completed a written plea form and entered a no contest plea. The terms of the plea included probation and up to 365 days in the county jail. Appellant was released on her own recognizance pending sentence.
The facts are taken from the probation reports.
The vandalism case is No. 16-88424. The second case, which we will describe as the robbery case, is No. 17-89509. All statutory references are to the Penal Code. --------
On February 12, 2017, Ukiah police responded to a report of a woman screaming in front of a retail store. The woman stated that she was sitting on the ground in front of the store when appellant, who she did not know, and without any provocation, kicked her in the back, said the woman owed her money, and then took the woman's backpack. The backpack had a bottle of water, bars of soap, hand warmers, cookies and $6 (a $5 bill and a $1 bill). Appellant was found nearby, eating a cookie and drinking bottled water. Appellant consented to a search of her sweatshirt, where the hand warmers and a bar of soap were found. The $6 was later found in appellant's shoe. Appellant was charged with second degree robbery and an enhancement for committing an offense while on-bail (§§ 211/212.5, subd. (c), 12022.1) (the robbery case). The robbery case was resolved through a plea. Appellant completed a written plea form and entered a no contest plea, and the enhancement was dismissed.
On July 17, 2017, imposition of sentence was suspended and appellant was placed on three years probation in both cases with certain terms and conditions including county jail time and enrolling and completing residential treatment. In mid-August 2017, after appellant was ordered transported to a residential treatment center, she walked out the next day. She was terminated from the program, and called probation to pick her up.
The probation department filed petitions to revoke appellant's probation. On September 6, 2017, appellant, having been advised of her right to a hearing, admitted the violations of probation. There was no agreement as to sentence.
On September 19, 2017, the court held a status hearing and agreed to defense counsel's request to continue the sentencing for one month to attempt to find a suitable program. On October 19, 2017, probation was revoked and appellant was sentenced to the midterm of three years on the robbery case, and a consecutive sentence of eight months (one-third of the midterm) on the vandalism case. The case was continued for a determination of presentence custody credits. On October 24, 2017, the court determined that appellant had 147 days presentence credit on the vandalism case (128 actual and 19 conduct days under § 2933.1) and 115 days presentence credit on the robbery case (100 actual days and 15 conduct days under § 2933.1).
This appeal followed.
DISCUSSION
We have reviewed the entire record on appeal and conclude there are no meritorious issues to be argued. Before appellant admitted the violations of probation, the court made sure appellant understood the constitutional rights she was waiving and the consequences of her admissions. We see no error in the sentence. Appellant was effectively represented by counsel.
We conclude there are no arguable issues within the meaning of People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.
The judgment is affirmed.
/s/_________
Miller, J. We concur: /s/_________
Kline, P.J. /s/_________
Richman, J.