P. v. Dummer
Filed 7/28/06 P. v. Dummer CA1/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 ONE
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. WESLEY FRANK DUMMER, Defendant and Appellant. | A112834 (Solano County Super. Ct. No. FCR215848) |
Defendant appeals from a judgment following revocation of a grant of probation. His counsel has raised no issues and asks this court for an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any issues that would, if resolved favorably to defendant, result in reversal or modification of the judgment. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436; see Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259.) We affirm.
On May 19, 2004, a felony complaint was filed charging defendant with petty theft with a prior conviction. (Pen. Code, §§ 484, subd. (a)/666.) It was also alleged that at the time of the offense defendant was released on bail or his own recognizance within the meaning of Penal Code[1] section 12022.1. On June 30, 2004 pursuant to a negotiated disposition defendant entered a plea of no contest. Pursuant to the terms of the plea bargain, the section 12022.1 allegation was dismissed, two other cases[2] were dismissed with Harvey[3] waivers, and defendant would be placed on probation with a maximum of 180 days in jail. Sentence was pronounced on July 28, 2004 and in accordance with terms of the plea bargain, defendant was placed on probation for three years subject to various terms and conditions and ordered to serve 61 days in jail with credit for 61 days already served.
A request to revoke defendant's probation for his failure to report to his probation officer was filed on January 6, 2005. On February 9, 2005, defendant admitted the probation violation. On March 1, 2005, he was sentenced to the mid-term of two years in state prison, execution was suspended, he was ordered to serve 90 days in jail and probation was reinstated on the same terms and conditions. On November 23, 2005, defendant was again before the court and admitted violating the terms and conditions of his probation by failing to obey all laws. Probation was terminated unsuccessfully and defendant was sentenced to the previously imposed two years in state prison and ordered to pay statutory fines. Pursuant to an agreement between the district attorney and defense counsel defendant was given a total of 181 days of custody credits. This appeal followed.
The facts of the underlying offense supporting the complaint filed May 19, 2004 are set forth in the report of the probation officer filed July 28, 2004. On April 8, 2004, a police officer took custody of defendant after he was observed being chased by employees of Albertson's. The store employees reported that defendant loaded a cart with grocery items and left the store without paying. When they attempted to stop him, he said that his â€
