People v. Bolden CA4/1

Filed 8/27/20 P. v. Bolden CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D077178

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. SCN408406)

LEON BOLDEN,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, David J. Danielson, Judge. Affirmed.

Shay Dinata-Hanson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Plaintiff and Respondent. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Steve Oetting and Anthony Da Silva, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendant and Appellant.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The facts of the underlying convictions are not directly relevant on this appeal. On August 28, 2014, defendant was incarcerated following convictions for infliction of corporal injury on a spouse, and rape by force in

violation of Penal Code1 sections 273.5, subdivision (a) and 261.5, subdivision (a)(2), respectively. On May 18, 2017, he was released on active parole and was required to register as a sex offender pursuant to section 290. On December 10, 2019, it was discovered by his parole agent that defendant had been registering as a transient with the San Diego Police Department since May 21, 2019. The GPS tracking device on defendant revealed he had been living in Vista since June 16, 2019. He should have registered the Vista address by close of business on June 24, 2019. He last registered as a transient on November 18, 2019. Defendant was arrested at the Vista address on December 12, 2019, for violating the requirement he register his Vista address. During an interview at the jail, defendant acknowledged his duty to register as a sex offender. The interviewer, a parole agent, read that portion of his sex registration form that indicated it was an offense to provide incorrect information. Defendant stated he did not register the residence in Vista because he did not want his sex offender status to be known to his housemates. A complaint was filed charging defendant with failing to register with the law enforcement agency having jurisdiction over the new address location, within five working days of moving into a residence address.