P. v. Castro
Filed 8/15/06 P. v. Castro CA1/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FIVE
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. EMILIO CASTRO, Defendant and Appellant |
A111792
(San Francisco County Super. Ct. No. 192591) |
Defendant and appellant Emilio Castro was sentenced to state prison after revocation of his felony probation. Appellant contends that it was an abuse of discretion for the trial court to conduct the hearing on his probation violation prior to adjudication of the new criminal charges which formed the basis for the revocation. We disagree and affirm.
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On June 1, 2004 appellant entered a plea of guilty in the San Francisco Superior Court to possession of cocaine base, a violation of Health and Safety Code section 11352, subdivision (a). Imposition of sentence was suspended and he was placed on formal probation. Conditions of probation included a requirement to obey all laws, and not to possess any controlled substances without prescription. He was also subject to search of his person, residence and vehicle at any time, without warrant or probable cause. On October 5, 2004, appellant was arrested by the San Francisco Police Department. After observation of a â€
