Filed 9/12/18 P. v. Evans CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Yuba)
----
| THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
ALEXANDRIA PETRONELLA EVANS,
Defendant and Appellant.
| C086351
(Super. Ct. No. CRF15-0000152-01, CRF15-0000077-03)
|
On February 13, 2015, defendant Alexandria Petronella Evans and several codefendants were charged in case No. CRF15-0000077-03 (the first case) with robbery, attempting to dissuade/prevent a person from reporting a crime, making criminal threats, aggravated assault, burglary, vandalism, resisting an officer, and interfering with an officer by force or violence. Charges for three counts of battery and active participation in a criminal street gang were later added. It was also alleged that the crimes had been committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang.
On March 24, 2015, defendant was charged in case No. CRF15-0000152-01 (the second case) with two counts of assault by means of force likely to cause great bodily injury. It was further alleged that the offenses were committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang. Defendant was also charged with membership in a criminal street gang.
On June 22, 2015, defendant pled no contest in the first case to attempting to dissuade/prevent a person from reporting a crime and assault by means likely to cause great bodily injury, and admitted the enhancement that the offenses were committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang. Defendant also pled no contest in the second case to one count of assault by means likely to cause great bodily injury. Defendant’s maximum exposure, based on the plea agreement, was 14 years in prison. The trial court placed defendant on probation with various terms and conditions.
On October 13, 2015, the probation department filed a petition for revocation of defendant’s probation based upon her conviction for petty theft and failure to register as the result of gang enhancements. Defendant admitted the violations and waived custody credits to date. The trial court imposed a 13-year prison sentence, suspended execution of sentence, and reinstated defendant on probation.
On December 20, 2017, the probation department filed another petition for revocation of defendant’s probation based upon allegations of criminal conduct, including possession of a firearm, assault with a deadly weapon, and battery causing great bodily injury, occurring on December 1, 2017. At a contested violation of probation hearing, evidence was presented that, on December 1, 2017, officers investigated an incident where shots were fired and a female assaulted with a firearm. At subsequent interviews, defendant admitted she was in possession of a firearm and had assaulted a female. At the hearing, defendant admitted she had made the admissions to the officers but claimed the statements were to cover for a boyfriend who actually owned the weapon.
The trial court found defendant had violated the terms of her probation, revoked probation, and ordered execution of the previously suspended sentence. The 13-year prison term consisted of the low term of two years in the first case, plus 10 years for the gang allegation, and a consecutive one-year sentence (one-third the midterm) for the assault in the second case. As to each case the court imposed a $300 restitution fine and a $300 parole revocation fine, a $30 criminal conviction fee, and a $40 court operations fee. Restitution in the amount of $889.61 was ordered to be paid to the victim in the first case. Defendant was also awarded 323 days of presentence custody credits in that case.
Counsel for defendant filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant. Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
/s/
Robie, Acting P. J.
We concur:
/s/
Butz, J.
/s/
Renner, J.
