P. v. Fay
Filed 5/31/06 P. v. Fay CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Butte)
----
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ROGER PETER FAY, Defendant and Appellant. | C051098
(Super. Ct. Nos. CM018696, CM017888)
|
This appeal involves two cases consolidated for sentencing.
In October 2002, defendant Roger Peter Fay pleaded no contest to misdemeanor second degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459; hereafter references to undesignated sections are to the Penal Code) in case No. CM017888 and was placed on three years informal probation, on the condition, among others, that he serve 25 days in county jail.
In May 2003, while on probation in case No. CM017888, defendant pleaded no contest in case No. CM018696 to petty theft with a prior theft conviction (§ 666). Imposition of sentence was suspended and defendant was placed on three years formal probation on the conditions, among others, that he serve 90 days in county jail, not use or possess alcoholic beverages, and obey all laws. Probation in case No. CM017888 was revoked and reinstated.
In October 2003, defendant admitted violating the conditions of his probation by being under the influence of alcohol in public (§ 647, subd. (f)). Probation was reinstated with the additional condition that he serve 120 days in county jail, with the provision that he could be released after 60 days, at probation's discretion, â€
