P.v. McDonald

Filed 1/19/07  P.v. McDonald CA2/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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  This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 TWO

            APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los  Angeles County.

Michael A. Tynan, Judge.  Affirmed.

            Jennifer L. Peabody, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

            Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Robert F. Katz, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, Michael J. Wise, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

___________________________________________________

            Following a contested probation violation hearing, appellant Wayne McDonald was found in violation of probation and sentenced to a prison term of three years.  Contrary to appellant's contention, his constitutional rights were not violated when the court conducted the probation hearing with notice that the prosecution would proceed with such a hearing, but without notice of the exact date of the hearing. 

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

            Appellant was charged in an information (case No. SA053638) with three counts of second degree burglary (Pen. Code, §  459)^[1] and two counts of grand theft (§  487, subd. (a)).  Appellant waived his right to counsel and represented himself.  Pursuant to a negotiated disposition, appellant pled no contest to two of the burglary counts, and the court subsequently dismissed the remaining counts.  The court stayed imposition of sentence and placed appellant on formal probation for a period of three years, with the condition that he serve 291 days in the county jail (amounting to time already served plus credits).  At the time of his plea, appellant acknowledged that if he violated probation, he could be sentenced to a maximum of three years eight months in state prison.

            On October 3, 2005, the prosecution filed in the superior court a â€