People v. Noble CA6
Filed 12/11/15 P. v. Noble CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, H040844 & H040845 (Santa Clara County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. Nos. C1351206 & C1114402) v.
JESSE KENNETH NOBLE,
Defendant and Appellant.
Defendant Jesse Kenneth Noble appeals a judgment entered following his plea of no contest to inflicting corporal injury on a cohabitant (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a)), and driving under the influence (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a)). On appeal, defendant asserts that two of his probation conditions should be modified to add a knowledge requirement. Defendant also argues his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the court’s imposition of probation supervision fees without first determining his ability to pay the fees pursuant to Penal Code section 1203.1b.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE1 There are two separate cases underlying this appeal. Case No. C1351206 involves domestic violence, and case No. C1114402 involves driving under the influence.2 In case No. C1351206, defendant pleaded no contest to inflicting corporal injury on a cohabitant (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a)), and admitted he inflicted great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 12022.7, subd. (a)) and committed the crime while out of custody on bail (Pen. Code, § 12022.1). The court suspended imposition of sentence, placed defendant on three years formal probation, and ordered defendant to serve one year in the county jail. As a condition of probation, the court ordered that defendant “shall not possess any item that under the law would be considered a deadly or dangerous weapon,” and “shall not possess or use illegal drugs or illegal controlled substances or go anywhere he knows illegal drugs or non-prescribed controlled substances are used or sold.” The court ordered defendant to pay $878.00 in fines and fees, of which $30.00 was for a probation supervision fee. In case No. C1114402, defendant pleaded no contest to driving while under the influence (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a)), and admitted that he willfully refused to submit to a chemical test (Veh. Code, § 23577, subd. (a)) and had a prior drunk driving conviction. The court suspended imposition of sentence, placed defendant on five years formal probation, and ordered defendant to serve eight months in the county jail, concurrent with the jail time imposed in the domestic violence case. As a condition of probation, the court ordered: “The Defendant is not to possess or consume alcohol or
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)