P. v. Green
Filed 8/24/06 P. v. Green CA4/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. GEROLD BRIAN GREEN, Defendant and Appellant. | E039263 (Super.Ct.No. FSB51995) OPINION |
APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. John N. Martin, Judge. Affirmed.
Amanda F. Benedict, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Senior Assistant Attorney General, and Scott C. Taylor, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
INTRODUCTION
Defendant Gerold Brian Green (defendant) contends that the interrogation term in his probation agreement is unconstitutional and seeks its deletion.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On September 10, 2005, defendant was arrested after he took three music compact discs into the bathroom of the Target store in Redlands, came out with the items in his pocket, and tried to leave the store. On September 13, 2005, he was charged by felony complaint with second degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459, count 1)[1] and petty theft with priors (§§ 666 & 484, subd. (a), count 2.) In a plea bargain on September 21, defendant pled guilty to count 2. At a sentencing hearing on October 20, the court dismissed count 1, and imposed three years of formal probation with terms and conditions as recommended in the probation report and partially modified by the court.
The probation report showed that defendant had had a total of eight prior convictions in the 10 years between 1993 and 2003. The convictions included drug offenses (Health & Saf. Code, § 11550); passing a fictitious check (§ 476); receiving stolen property (§ 496, subd. (a)); giving false identification to police officers (§ 148.9, subd. (a)); petty theft (§ 484, subd. (a)); and petty theft with priors (§ 666). Defendant had been granted probation or had it reinstated a total of 10 times between 1993 and 2003. He was on a grant of summary probation when he committed the current offenses.
One condition of defendant's probation agreement was that he â€
