Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Superior Court County of Los Angeles No. PA054021, Ronald S. Coen, Judge.
Julie Schumer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance e for Plaintiff and Respondent.
COFFEE, J.
Kenneth Allen Goodlett appeals an order revoking his probation and imposing a state prison term of five years. On January 13, 2006, appellant pleaded guilty to possession for sale of cocaine base. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5.) The court suspended imposition of sentence and placed appellant on probation for three years on various terms and conditions. Among other conditions, appellant was required to report to his probation officer, refrain from illegal drug use, and report regularly for drug testing.
Appellant failed to report regularly to his probation officer from February through May 2006. On June 14, 2006, the court found that he had violated probation; it reinstated his probation. Appellant missed four drug tests from December 2006 through March 2007. He also tested positive for cocaine on four occasions from May through June 2007. Consequently, on August 2, 2007, the court found that he had violated probation. It reinstated appellant's probation and ordered him to enter and complete a one-year residential drug treatment program.
In January, 2009, the probation officer reported that appellant had not completed a one-year residential drug treatment program; that he had failed to report for testing on seven occasions from December 2007 through October 2008; that he did not report regularly to the probation officer; and that he had tested positive for cocaine in November, 2007. On January 9, 2009, the court revoked appellant’s probation based on the probation officer's report. It conducted a formal probation violation hearing on January 28, 2009 and concluded that appellant had violated his probation. It then ordered that his probation remain revoked and sentenced him to five years in state prison.
We appointed counsel to represent appellant on this appeal. After examining the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues and requesting that this court independently examine the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.
On June 22, 2009, we advised appellant that he had 30 days in which to submit a written brief or letter raising any contentions or arguments he wished us to consider. Appellant did not respond.
We have examined the entire record. We are satisfied that appellant's counsel has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment (order revoking probation) is affirmed.
We concur: GILBERT, P.J., PERREN, J.