People v. Hall CA2/6

Filed 4/7/15 P. v. Hall CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B256624 (Super. Ct. No. 1463429) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Santa Barbara County)

v.

ROBERT VICTOR HALL,

Defendant and Appellant.

Robert Victor Hall appeals an order granting formal probation with terms and conditions following his nolo contendere plea to felony vandalism. (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (b)(1).)1 We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On May 14, 2013, a felony complaint charged Hall with vandalizing the windows in his former girlfriend's apartment and vehicle. On August 26, 2013, the trial court held a preliminary examination during which two Lompoc police officers and Hall testified. Evidence at the preliminary examination established that Lydia Ybarra and Hall were formerly in a romantic relationship and had a child together. Hall "had problems accepting that they were no longer a couple." He visited Ybarra in the late evening of April 12, 2013, and demanded entry into her apartment. When Ybarra

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

refused, Hall broke several apartment windows. Frightened, Ybarra telephoned for police assistance. Neighbors saw Hall break Ybarra's apartment windows with a hammer and they threatened to call the police. Hall then broke the windshield and a side window in Ybarra's vehicle before leaving the apartment complex. On April 19, 2013, Lompoc Police Detective Mark Powell interviewed Hall who admitted breaking Ybarra's windows. Hall stated that he "had anger issues" and would seek "anger counseling." Hall testified that Ybarra took his personal belongings and would not return them. He was frustrated, "fed up," and "took [his] frustration out on her car." Hall also stated that he had been drinking that evening and the "'stupid' light bulb in [his] head went off." He added that he paid restitution for the damaged windows and obtained counseling for his anger problems. Following receipt of evidence, the trial court declined to reduce the felony vandalism charge to a misdemeanor pursuant to section 17, subdivision (b). The court then decided the evidence was sufficient to hold Hall to answer for felony vandalism. On November 13, 2013, Hall pleaded nolo contendere to felony vandalism. In his handwriting, Hall stated that the trial court could sentence him as a felon or reduce his sentence to a misdemeanor according "to what is just and appropriate." Prior to accepting Hall's plea, the trial judge stated his "intention to reduce this matter to a misdemeanor at the sentencing hearing if things line up the way I think they are going to line up. That is to say community support, the victim comes in and says she . . . doesn't mind it getting reduced from a felony. But most importantly that we understand each other, Mr. Hall. I'm not going to tolerate any nonsense like this in the future from you, and I'm not going to tolerate any alcohol from you while on probation . . . ." On December 18, 2013, the trial court held a sentencing hearing during which Hall's character witnesses and Ybarra testified favorably to Hall. Ybarra said she was no longer concerned about her safety. Hall had paid full restitution. The trial judge noted that Hall "basically pled open . . . to the felony with a possibility of reducing it to a