People v. Benites CA3

Filed 1/22/16 P. v. Benites CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Yolo) ----

THE PEOPLE, C078380

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CRF-08-2607)

v.

ALEXANDER FRANK BENITES,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Alexander Frank Benites has asked this court to review the record to determine whether there exist any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we will affirm the judgment, with an instruction to the trial court to correct the abstract of 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

On April 9, 2008, defendant was released from prison. The next day, he reported to his parole officer in Woodland. Defendant was required to register as a sex offender pursuant to Penal Code section 290.1 Because he was a high-risk sex offender, he was required to wear a global positioning system (GPS) tracking device on his ankle as a special condition of parole and live no closer than 2,000 feet of a school or park. (§ 3003.5, subd. (b).) The parole officer advised defendant about charging the tracking device and that if he lost, stole, or damaged the tracking system, he could be charged with grand or petty theft. Defendant signed the special condition, stating that he understood the condition and directions for charging the tracking device. Parole approved of and paid for defendant’s placement at Granada Motel where defendant met his parole officer on April 23, 2008. The next day, defendant was required to pay for his own lodging. Defendant was advised that in the event he became homeless, he had to advise his parole officer. The next day, defendant became homeless and called the parole officer who instructed defendant to go to the parole office to sign additional paperwork. He did not comply with that instruction and removed his tracking device, leaving it on a bus. A bus driver recovered the device but the battery charger was not found on the bus. The strap on the device had been torn or cut. The replacement cost for the device and charger was $1,500 and $50, respectively. Although defendant had registered on April 15, 2008, he did not reregister as homeless after April 24, 2008. On May 6, 2008, defendant turned himself in.