People v. Ward CA2/4

Filed 8/16/16 P. v. Ward CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR

THE PEOPLE, B262842

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA420109) v.

RONALD WARD,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Richard S. Kemalyan, Judge. Affirmed. William J. Capriola, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler and Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorneys General, Shawn McGahey Webb and Nima Razfar, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ______________________________

Ronald Ward appeals from the judgment entered upon revocation of his probation. He contends he did not validly waive his right to a probation revocation hearing. We disagree and affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY In February 2014, appellant was charged with transportation, sale, or offer to sell cocaine. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352.) Five prior prison terms were alleged, three of which were for drug convictions. (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b); Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.2, subd. (a).) Appellant had mental health issues, and a long history of homelessness and drug problems. Although he had told a mental health evaluator that he was not interested in rehabilitation, appellant asked to be sent to a dual diagnosis program. The court reluctantly agreed to consider that option. In March 2014, appellant pled no contest and admitted the prior prison term allegations. The court imposed and suspended a six-year prison term and placed appellant on three-year formal probation, on condition that he complete a one-year treatment program. Appellant was warned that leaving the program would result in execution of the six-year sentence. Probation was revoked in May 2014. After appellant stipulated to a probation violation, probation was reinstated on the same terms in September 2014. In March 2015, appellant appeared in court on a bench warrant pickup. The court explained that, on February 3, 2015, appellant had been ordered to enroll in a dual- diagnosis program for one year and to return to court within 48 hours of leaving or having been terminated from the program.1 Defense counsel related what appellant had told her: A few hours after checking into the program, appellant had asked permission to get something to eat. While he was out, he suffered a “psychotic episode,” during which he “experienced some auditory hallucinations directing him to engage in certain behavior