People v. Cisneros CA3

Filed 8/17/20 P. v. Cisneros CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (San Joaquin) ----

THE PEOPLE, C089994

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. STK-CR-FE- 2015-0013591) v.

GREGORIO CISNEROS,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Gregorio Cisneros asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the trial court’s order.

1

BACKGROUND The People’s October 20, 2015, felony complaint charged defendant with assault with a deadly weapon, to wit scissors (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)),1 with a special allegation that defendant had inflicted great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)). Defendant’s competence to stand trial was questioned, and he was referred for evaluation. Both individuals evaluating defendant diagnosed him with unspecified schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorder, but only one thought he was incompetent to stand trial. Ultimately, the court found defendant incompetent, suspended criminal proceedings, and committed defendant for mental health treatment. On August 4, 2016, criminal proceedings were reinstated after the court determined that defendant’s competency had been restored. Thereafter, on August 9, 2016, the People amended the complaint to charge defendant with assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(4)), to which defendant pleaded no contest. The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on five years’ formal probation with 364 days in county jail. On January 8, 2019, and following defendant’s successful graduation from mental health court, the superior court granted the probation department’s request to change defendant’s probation from formal to informal. Thereafter, on June 12, 2019, defendant filed a motion to reduce the felony charge to a misdemeanor pursuant to section 17, subdivision (b)(1). The People opposed the motion arguing: (1) there had been a negotiated disposition and (2) that it was necessary to keep defendant on felony probation for the remaining two years of his term so he would remain subject to search. Ultimately, the superior court denied the motion without prejudice, indicating that in light of defendant’s ongoing mental illness and the court’s