People v. Larabee CA3

Filed 6/30/14 P. v. Larabee CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Butte) ----

THE PEOPLE, C075157

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CM037820)

v.

WILLIAM LESTER LARABEE, JR.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant William Lester Larabee, Jr., filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal.1 (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment.

1 Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from defendant.

1

We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)

We take the facts underlying defendant’s offense from the preliminary hearing which, along with the probation officer’s report, provided the factual basis for defendant’s eventual plea.

On the evening of December 5, 2012, Butte County Sheriff’s Deputy Hugh Hooks saw an older model gray Ford driving through a school parking lot, exit the lot without signaling, and turn onto the road at a high rate of speed. The roads were wet and it was very windy.

Deputy Hooks followed the car and saw the driver, later determined to be defendant, make several turns without signaling, including an abrupt turn that nearly caused Hooks to collide with the car. Hooks activated his overhead lights and siren to initiate a traffic stop. Instead of stopping, defendant sped up. Defendant ran a stop sign and stop light, causing other traffic to take evasive maneuvers, and reached speeds of 60 miles per hour in a 25-mile-per-hour zone.