P. v. Meyer
Filed 3/30/06 P. v. Meyer 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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. GRANT CURTIS MEYER, Defendant and Appellant. | A109591 (Sonoma County Super. Ct. No. SCR28260) |
Defendant Grant Curtis Meyer appeals from an order revoking his probation. We conclude that his points are well taken, reverse the order and remand the matter to the trial court for further proceedings.
Background
On January 14, 2000, defendant was placed on five years' probation after suffering convictions of spousal battery (Pen. Code, § 243, subd. (e)(1)), stalking (Pen. Code, § 646.9, subd. (b)), dissuading a witness (Pen. Code, § 136.1, subd. (b)(2)) and disobeying a court order (Pen. Code, § 166, subd. (a)(4)). On July 14, 2004, defendant was arrested for possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) and possession of paraphernalia used for the consumption of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11346, subd. (a)). Defendant's probation was revoked, summarily, on July 23, 2004.
The trial court conducted a probation hearing over several days in December 2004. Evidence adduced at the hearing disclosed that the police conducted a probation search of two houses located on the same property, both owned by defendant. It appeared that one of the houses was being used as a shop, rather than as a residence. In the master bedroom of the other house, the police found a small cosmetics mirror with white residue on it, and two glass pipes with white residue on them. The residue tested â€
