People v. Garcia CA2/6

Filed 6/16/16 P. v. Garcia CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. B267203 (Super. Ct. No. 2010006106) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Ventura County)

v.

DOMINIC B. GARCIA,

Defendant and Appellant.

Dominic B. Garcia appeals from judgment after an order revoking his postrelease community supervision (PRCS). (Pen. Code, § 3450 et seq.)1 He contends the revocation procedures employed by Ventura County violated his right to due process because: he was not provided with counsel at his probable cause hearing before the supervising agency; was not brought before the court for arraignment within 10 days of arrest; did not have a probable cause hearing before the court within 15 days of arrest; a probation officer asked him to waive his rights before the revocation petition was filed; and a probation officer (rather than a judicial officer) served as the probable cause hearing officer. We affirm.

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise stated.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND In 2010, Garcia was granted probation and ordered to serve 365 days in jail after plea of guilty to corporal injury to spouse/cohabitant (§ 273.5, subd. (a)), dissuading a witness from reporting a crime (§ 136.1, subd. (b)(1)), violation of a protective order (§ 273.6, subd. (b)), and petty theft (§ 484, subd. (a)). In 2011, probation was revoked and Garcia was sentenced to a two-year prison term. Garcia was released in 2012 on PRCS following realignment. The Ventura County Probation Agency is his supervising agency. As a condition of release, he agreed to report to probation within two days of his release from custody, not be absent from Ventura County for more than 48 hours without prior written approval, maintain a residence with a street address as approved by probation, submit to drug testing, attend domestic violence counseling sessions, and participate in programs as directed. He also agreed the probation agency could, without a court hearing, order “flash incarceration” in a county jail for up to 10 days if he violated the conditions of his release. (§ 3453, subd. (q).) In May 2015,2 after being released from custody following his fourth violation of probation, Garcia absconded. He was arrested in July for failing to report as directed, absconding from Ventura County, failing to report for drug testing, and failing to re-enroll in domestic violence and behavioral health counseling programs. Three days after his arrest, Garica was arraigned in court with counsel present. On the same day, Senior Deputy Probation Officer Venessa Meza met with Garcia. Meza advised Garcia in writing that he had the right to written notice of the alleged violations, the right to an administrative hearing within two days, and the right at that hearing to speak on his own behalf and present letters and documents. Meza conducted an administrative probable cause hearing, and concluded there was probable cause to believe that Garcia violated the terms of PRCS. Meza advised Garica of his