Filed 4/18/17 P. v. Bilbro CA6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.


IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT


THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

RICKY HYDE BILBRO,

Defendant and Appellant.
H043735
(Monterey County
Super. Ct. Nos. SS131469A,
SS151076A)

I. INTRODUCTION
In case No. SS131469A defendant pleaded no contest to possession of a controlled substance, heroin (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)) and possession of a controlled substance, methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) and admitted that he had one prior violent and serious felony conviction within the meaning of the Three Strikes law (Pen. Code, § 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)). After defendant admitted violating probation, the trial court terminated probation and imposed a total county jail term of 720 days to be served concurrently with the sentences in case Nos. SS151076A and MM336043A.
In case No. SS151076A defendant pleaded no contest to evading an officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)), resisting a peace officer (§ 148, subd. (a)(1)), possession of a designated controlled substance, Alprazolam (Health & Saf. Code, § 11375, subd. (b)(2)), and unlawful vehicle lighting (Veh. Code, § 24600, subd. (a)). He also admitted that he had one prior violent and serious felony conviction within the meaning of the Three Strikes law (§ 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)). The trial court imposed the agreed-upon state prison term of 32 months.
Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal in both cases, and we appointed counsel to represent him in this court. Appointed counsel has filed an opening brief that states the case and facts but raises no issue. We notified defendant of his right to submit written argument on his own behalf within 30 days. The 30-day period has elapsed and we have received no response from defendant.
Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106 (Kelly), we have reviewed the entire record. Following the California Supreme Court’s direction in Kelly, supra, at page 110, we provide “a brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case, the crimes of which the defendant was convicted, and the punishment imposed.”
II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
In case No. SS131469A, on July 25, 2013, police and probation officers conducting a parole search of defendant’s home found methamphetamine and heroin that defendant admitted he had hidden in a bathroom light fixture.
In case No. SS151076A, on June 28, 2015, a Monterey County Sheriff’s Department deputy attempted to conduct a traffic stop for non-operational taillights on a vehicle driven by defendant. Defendant evaded the traffic stop and a police chase ensued. The police chase ended when defendant’s vehicle crashed. A baggy containing Alprazolam pills, a controlled substance, was found when defendant was taken into custody.
III. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
A. Case No. SS131469A
The complaint filed in July 2013 in case No. SS131469A charged defendant with possession of a controlled substance, heroin (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a); count 1), possession of a controlled substance, methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a); count 2), and possession of controlled substance paraphernalia (Health & Saf. Code, § 11364.1, subd. (a); count 3). The complaint also alleged that defendant had one prior violent and serious felony conviction within the meaning of the Three Strikes law (§§ 667.5, subd. (c), 1192.7, subd. (c)) and had served a prison prior term (§667.5, subd. (b)).
In August 2013 defendant pleaded no contest to count 1 (possession of heroin) and count 2 (possession of methamphetamine) and admitted the allegation that he had one prior violent and serious felony conviction within the meaning of the Three Strikes law. The trial court granted defendant’s oral motion pursuant to People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497 and struck the prior strike conviction in the interest of justice. Defendant was found eligible for drug treatment court.
In March 2014 the trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on probation for a period of three years, with various terms and conditions. In July 2014 probation was modified after defendant admitted to falsifying the signatures on AA/NA meeting cards.
In January 2015 the trial court granted defendant’s petition pursuant to section 1170.18, which was enacted as part of Proposition 47, to have his felony convictions for possession of heroin and possession of methamphetamine redesignated as misdemeanors.
In March 2015 the probation department filed a notice of probation violation alleging that defendant had failed to report to probation as directed and had also failed to abstain from the use of narcotics. The trial court revoked probation to retain jurisdiction and ordered defendant to report to the drug treatment court and begin the STAR program. In June 2015 the probation department filed another notice of probation violation due to a new case (case No. SS151076A) being filed, and the trial court revoked probation to retain jurisdiction. In July 2015 defendant admitted the probation violations.
In May 2016 the trial court revoked and terminated probation. The court imposed a county jail term of 360 days as to count 1 (possession of heroin) and 360 days on count 2 (possession of methamphetamine) for a total of 720 days, with credit for time served of 665 days, to be served concurrently with the sentences in case Nos. SS151076A and MM336043A. The court also imposed various fines and fees, including a restitution fine of $600 (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)) and the previously suspended probation revocation restitution fine of $600 (§ 1202.44).
B. Case No. SS151076A
The complaint filed in June 2015 in case No. SS151076A charged defendant with evading an officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a); count 1), resisting a peace officer (§ 148, subd. (a)(1); count 2), possession of a designated controlled substance, Alprazolam (Health & Saf. Code, § 11375, subd. (b)(2); count 3), and unlawful vehicle lighting (Veh. Code, § 24600, subd. (a); count 4).
In July 2015 defendant pleaded no contest to all counts, leaving “all options open to the [trial] court,” in exchange for the prosecution agreeing not to amend the complaint to allege any prior convictions. In August 2015 the trial court granted defendant’s motion for a continuance of sentencing to allow defendant to remain in a residential treatment program. The motion was granted on the conditions that if defendant failed to successfully complete the residential treatment program, violated the law, or failed to appear in court, the prosecution could amend the complaint to add the prior conviction and defendant could be sentenced to a maximum of six years.
In September 2015 defendant failed to appear in court and by November 2015 he was back in custody. An amended complaint was filed in February 2016 that added the allegation that defendant had one prior violent and serious felony conviction within the meaning of the Three Strikes law (§ 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)). Defendant filed a motion to set aside the amended complaint.
In May 2016 defendant entered into a negotiated disposition. Defendant agreed to withdraw his motion to set aside the amended complaint and admit the prior strike allegation in exchange for a state prison term of 32 months (the lower term of 16 months, doubled) on count 1 (evading an officer). Probation was denied. The trial court imposed the agreed-upon sentence of 32 months and ordered defendant to pay various fines and fees, including a restitution fine of $400 (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)) and a suspended parole revocation fine of $400 (§ 1202.45).
IV. WENDE ANALYSIS
Defendant filed a notice of appeal in both cases that states that the appeal is based on the sentence or other matters occurring after the plea that do not affect the validity of the plea. Having carefully reviewed the entire record, we conclude that there are no arguable issues on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at pp. 441-443.)
V. DISPOSITION
In case No. SS131469A, the judgment is affirmed. In case No. SS151076A, the judgment is affirmed.



____________________________________
BAMATTRE-MANOUKIAN, J.





WE CONCUR:




_________________________________
ELIA, ACTING P.J.









_________________________________
MIHARA, J.













People v. Bilbro
H043735