People v. Valerio CA6

Filed 9/22/16 P. v. Valerio CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, H043341 (Santa Clara County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. C1366998)

v.

GEORGE BARRON VALERIO,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant George Barron Valerio appeals the trial court’s postjudgment order disqualifying him from further participation in a Proposition 36 (the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000) drug treatment program and ordering him to serve a jail term. Defendant had pleaded no contest to one felony count of possession of a controlled substance (methamphetamine) (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)). The court suspended imposition of sentence and granted defendant two years’ probation in accordance with the provisions of Proposition 36 and Penal Code section 1210.1. Defendant has appealed the original judgment in a separate appeal (case No. H041564). While on Proposition 36 probation, defendant tested positive for methamphetamine ten times and admitted three separate violations of probation based on those positive drug tests. After defendant admitted his third probation violation, the court disqualified him from further Proposition 36 probation services, and imposed a 60-day jail term, with probation to end upon his release from jail. The appeal in this case is from that order.

We appointed counsel to represent defendant in this court. Appointed counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), which stated the case and the facts but raised no specific issues on appeal. We notified defendant of his right to submit written argument on his own behalf within 30 days. The 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no written argument from defendant. After reviewing the entire record, we will conclude there is no arguable issue on appeal and we will affirm the order terminating defendant’s Proposition 36 probation and sentencing him to 60 days in jail.