People v. Esparza CA3

Filed 3/4/15 P. v. Esparza CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C075007

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CM027560)

v.

ANTONIO RICHARD ESPARZA,

Defendant and Appellant.

This case comes to us pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Defendant Antonio Richard Esparza filed a supplemental brief arguing that the Butte County trial court erred in imposing consecutive state prison terms for his Sacramento County and Butte County convictions. We address this issue, in addition to undertaking a review of the record as required by Wende, and affirm the judgment. 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.)

1

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On November 14, 2007, law enforcement officers executed a search warrant at defendant’s residence and located 548 grams of cocaine, two handguns, ammunition, a digital scale, and a Taser. Defendant was charged in Butte County Superior Court with possession of cocaine salt for sale, with the special allegation that he was armed with a firearm during the commission of the offense. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351; Pen. Code, § 12022, subd. (a)(1).)1 Defendant pleaded guilty and admitted the special allegation. On January 15, 2009, the trial court sentenced defendant to the mid-term of three years for possession of cocaine for sale and a consecutive one year for the armed enhancement. Execution of sentence was suspended pending successful completion of probation, which was conditioned upon, inter alia, service of 90 days in jail, a minimum of six months in residential treatment, and 200 hours of community service. Various fines and fees were also imposed. On June 10, 2009, defendant admitted violating his probation. Defendant had terminated his participation in his residential treatment program without permission. His probation was reinstated. On December 6, 2010, a second petition for violation of probation was filed alleging defendant had been intoxicated in violation of the conditions of his probation and had also violated the law by driving while intoxicated. A bench warrant was issued for defendant’s arrest. On March 8, 2012, the petition for violation of probation was amended, adding the allegation that defendant had violated the law by possessing cocaine for sale. At that time, defendant was in custody in the Sacramento County jail.