Filed 9/18/18 P. v. Jacobson CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Siskiyou)

----

Appointed counsel for defendant Christian Tommis Jacobson asked this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we will affirm the judgment.

I

In each of the applicable cases, the parties stipulated to a factual basis derived from the preliminary hearing transcript or the police report.

Case No. 12-1241

In July 2012, defendant broke into his ex-girlfriend’s home and caused about $6,000 in damages. He pleaded guilty to vandalism causing damage of $400 or more (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (b)(1)),[1] and the remaining charges were dismissed.

The trial court placed defendant on probation for three years with 90 days in county jail. It awarded 12 days of presentence credit (6 actual, 6 conduct) and ordered defendant to pay various fines and fees.

Case No. 13-1833

In December of 2013, defendant sat on top of his girlfriend and grabbed her throat with both hands until she could barely breathe. Later, defendant ignored officers’ commands, and he was found with an 8-to 12-inch fixed-blade knife.

In exchange for dismissal of the remaining counts, defendant pleaded no contest to carrying a dirk or dagger (§ 2131), corporal injury to a former cohabitant (§ 273.5, subd. (a)), and misdemeanor resisting arrest (§ 148, subd. (a)(1)). He admitted violating probation in case No. 12-1241.

The trial court placed defendant on probation for three years in case No. 13-1833. The trial court ordered defendant to participate in batterer’s treatment and imposed various fines and fees. Regarding case No. 12-1241, it reinstated probation and extended the term by one year three months.

Case No. 14-0880

In April of 2014, defendant broke an apartment manager’s window. When officers came to investigate, defendant resisted and was ultimately Tased. Two months later, defendant vandalized his apartment, causing around $22,000 in damage. Five days after that, defendant and a codefendant severely beat the apartment manager.

After a preliminary hearing, the trial court found defendant in violation of his probation. Defendant subsequently pleaded guilty to assault by force likely to cause great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(4)) and admitted enhancement allegations under sections 12022.7, subdivision (a); 667.5, subdivision (c)(8); 1192.7, subdivision (c)(8); and 1203, subdivision (e)(3). He also pleaded guilty to resisting an officer (§ 69), vandalism with damage of $400 or more (§ 594, subd. (b)(1)), misdemeanor vandalism (§ 594, subd. (b)(2)(a)), and escaping from arrest (§ 836.6, subd. (b)). In addition, he admitted violating probation in case Nos. 12-1241 and 13-1833.

The trial court imposed but suspended an aggregate 10-year state prison term and placed defendant on probation for five years, with 330 days in jail and 264 days of presentence credit (132 actual, 132 conduct).

Case No. 16-1092

In August of 2016, defendant was involved in a traffic collision. He gave a false name to responding officers. When officers told him he was under arrest, he resisted.

In exchange for a stipulated term and the dismissal of several counts with a Harvey[2] wavier, defendant pleaded guilty to resisting an officer (§ 69) and providing false identification to an officer (§ 148.9 subd. (a)). He also admitted a prior strike conviction allegation and admitted violating probation. He was released on a Cruz[3] waiver. The agreement was that defendant would receive concurrent time on the resisting an officer count unless he failed to appear, in which case he would receive a consecutive 16-month term (one third the middle term, doubled for the strike) on the resisting an officer count.

Before sentencing could be completed in this case, defendant failed to appear, resulting in a new case discussed below.

Case No. 17-0467

Defendant twice failed to appear, a new complaint was filed, and a resolution was once again reached. As explained to the trial court, defendant would plead to both counts of failing to appear in exchange for the dismissal of an enhancement and a stipulation that the new terms would run concurrently with the sentence imposed in his previous cases. As stipulated, he would receive a concurrent seven years four months on the failure to appear counts. Defendant thereafter pleaded guilty to two counts of failing to appear. (§ 1320, subd. (b).)

At sentencing, the trial court sentenced defendant to a stipulated aggregate term of 11 years four months for the prior cases, consisting of the following:

In case No. 14-0880, a four-year upper term for assault by force likely to cause great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(4)), along with a three-year enhancement for inflicting great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)); a consecutive eight-month term (one third the middle term) for resisting an officer (§ 69); and a consecutive eight-month term (one third the middle term) for vandalism (§ 594, subd. (b)(1)).

In case No. 12-1241, a consecutive eight-month term (one third the middle term) for vandalism. (§ 594, subd. (b)(1).)

In case No. 13-1833, a consecutive one-year term (one third the middle term) for corporal injury. (§ 273.5, subd. (a).)

And in case No. 16-1092, a consecutive 16-month term (one third the middle term, doubled for the prior strike conviction) for resisting arrest. (§ 69.)

Regarding the most recent case, case No. 17-0467, pursuant to the plea agreement, the trial court imposed a six-year term (the upper term, doubled for the prior strike conviction) for the first count of failing to appear (§ 1320, subd. (b)), and a consecutive 16-month term (one third the middle term, doubled for the prior strike conviction) for the other. Both would run concurrently with the 11-year four-month aggregate term for the other cases. For the three misdemeanor counts, the trial court imposed concurrent 90-day terms on each.

The trial court awarded presentence credit as follows:

For case No. 12-1241, 63 days (55 actual, 8 conduct); for case No. 13-1833, 81 days (71 actual, 10 conduct); for case No. 14-0880, 216 days (188 actual, 28 conduct); for case No. 16-1092, 124 days (108 actual, 16 conduct); and for case No. 17-0467, no credit.

The trial court also imposed various fines and fees.

Defendant did not obtain certificates of probable cause in any of his cases.

II

Appointed counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and asking this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (Wende, supra, 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 the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed and we received no communication from defendant.

Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

/S/

MAURO, Acting P. J.

We concur:

/S/

DUARTE, J.

/S/

HOCH, J.