P. v. Reed
Filed 4/21/06 P. v. Reed CA2/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LEROY REED, Defendant and Appellant. | B183238 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA 273699) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Mark V. Mooney, Judge. Affirmed.
________
William L. Heyman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, Margaret E. Maxwell and Susan S. Kim, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
_________
Defendant Leroy Reed appeals from the judgment imposing a three-year sentence after the revocation of probation. We affirm the judgment.
BACKGROUND
On November 10, 2004, Reed pleaded guilty to one count of possession of cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)). The trial court stayed the imposition of sentence and placed Reed on three years formal probation under Proposition 36 (Pen. Code, § 1210.1).
A few days later, Reed suffered a new arrest for the theft of an automobile jack and was charged with petty theft with a prior. (Pen. Code, § 666.) The People moved to revoke Reed's probation based on the new charge, which was ultimately dismissed.
At the March 25, 2005 probation revocation hearing, the trial court found that Reed had violated the terms of his probation by stealing the automobile jack. At the April 19, 2005 sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed the upper term of three years â€
