People v. Morales CA3

Filed 10/15/14 P. v. Morales CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (San Joaquin) ----

THE PEOPLE, C070673

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. SF108758A, LF011558A) v.

BYRON IGNACIO MORALES,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Byron Ignacio Morales pleaded guilty on two separate cases and was ultimately sentenced to state prison, but the court suspended execution of the sentence and placed defendant in the Delancey Street Foundation program. Thereafter, without conducting a probation revocation hearing, the trial court found defendant had violated his probation based on an unsigned letter from the Delancey Street Foundation indicating defendant had left the program. The court then executed the state prison sentence.

1

Defendant appealed.1 After we remanded directing the court to conduct a probation revocation hearing, the court did so, found defendant in violation of his probation, and executed the state prison sentence. In this second appeal, defendant contends there is insufficient evidence to support the finding that he violated his probation, and there is an error in the abstract. We reject defendant’s meritless argument concerning the sufficiency of the evidence but order a correction to the abstract and otherwise affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The First Probation Revocation and Appeal On July 9, 2008, defendant pleaded guilty to possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377) in San Joaquin County Superior Court, case No. SF108758A. Defendant was placed in a drug treatment program pursuant to Proposition 36, the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000, and given five years’ formal probation. Among other conditions of probation, defendant was required to obey all laws. On October 19, 2009, defendant pleaded guilty to vehicle theft (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)) and assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)) in San Joaquin County Superior Court, case No. LF011558A, and admitted violating probation in case No. SF108758A. Sentencing defendant in both cases, the trial court imposed an aggregate term of five years four months in state prison. The trial court suspended execution of sentence and placed defendant on five years’ informal probation on the condition that he successfully complete the Delancey Street Foundation program and comply with other conditions.