P. v. Carroll
Filed 4/28/06 P. v. Carroll Ca1/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 FIVE
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. EDWARD CARROLL, Defendant and Appellant. |
A109546
(Marin County Super. Ct. No. SC137277) |
Defendant Edward Carroll pleaded guilty to taking a vehicle without the owner's consent (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)) (count 2) and receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a)) (count 4).[1] As to each count, he admitted two prior felony conviction enhancements pursuant to Penal Code section 1203, subdivision (e)(4). The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and granted defendant five years' probation. Defendant challenges the trial court's imposition of a gang-related condition of that probation. We affirm.
Factual Background[2]
On September 3, 2004, Marin County police officers investigated a possible stolen vehicle. The victim's neighbor gave the officers a description of a person seen driving the stolen car. A short time later, the officers stopped defendant, who they believed matched the description given by the neighbor, while he was walking in the area. After the neighbor identified defendant as the person he saw driving the vehicle, the officers searched defendant and discovered a bag of methamphetamine and a gasoline credit card that did not have defendant's name on it. After arresting defendant, the officers found the vehicle parked nearby.
By tracking the named credit card holder, Patricia Brumley, the officers learned that Brumley's car and credit card had been stolen from a hospital parking lot the day before. Defendant had been at the hospital the day Brumley's car was stolen. The police located Brumley's vehicle in the area of defendant's arrest.
Defendant was initially sentenced to three years eight months in state prison. However, the trial court found that defendant committed these offenses because of his drug addiction and there was, therefore, a reasonable likelihood he would respond favorably to the drug treatment required as a condition of probation. The trial court thus suspended execution of his sentence and, in granting probation, imposed the gang-related probation condition at issue here. Defendant timely appeals.
Discussion
Defendant challenges the trial court's prohibition against â€
