People v. Hubbard CA3

Filed 9/4/20 P. v. Hubbard CA3 (opinion on rehearing) NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Shasta) ----

THE PEOPLE, C085620

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. 13F6066, 16F3752) v.

GINA ELIZABETH HUBBARD,

Defendant and Appellant.

Following a negotiated plea agreement, defendant Gina Elizabeth Hubbard was convicted of possessing methamphetamine and found in violation of a previously imposed probation. Pursuant to the terms of her plea agreement, defendant was sentenced to a split sentence of seven years eight months. On appeal, defendant contends the trial court erred in denying her motion to suppress evidence. She further contends her prior conviction for transporting methamphetamine was void and thus the sentence imposed in this matter is unlawful. She claims in the alternative that she received

1

ineffective assistance of counsel because her trial counsel failed to challenge the prior conviction and erroneously advised her to admit violating her probation. As to her search claim, we conclude there was no error. Of her remaining claims, only one is cognizable on appeal without a certificate of probable cause, the rest are not.

BACKGROUND In October 2013, in Shasta County Superior Court case No. 13F6066 (case No. 066), defendant pleaded guilty to transporting methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379, subd. (a)),1 with the allegation she was transporting for purposes of sale stricken from the information, and admitted to a prior narcotics conviction (§ 11370.2, subd. (c)). The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on three years’ formal probation. On May 12, 2016, Shasta County Sheriff’s Deputy Gregory Ketel stopped defendant while she was driving a motorcycle on Highway 44 in Shasta County. Defendant told Deputy Ketel she was on searchable probation. Deputy Ketel searched defendant and found .069 grams of methamphetamine and a methamphetamine pipe in her pocket. He also found multiple bags of methamphetamine (one weighing .83 grams and the rest weighing a combined total of approximately 13 grams) and another glass pipe in her backpack, as well as bottles of alcohol in the motorcycle’s “saddle bags.” In Shasta County Superior Court case No. 16F3752 (case No. 752), the People charged defendant with possession of methamphetamine for sale (§ 11378) and transportation of methamphetamine (§ 11379, subd. (a)). To both charges, the People appended allegations that defendant was previously convicted of possession for sale and possession for sale or transportation (§ 11370.2). The People further alleged defendant was ineligible for probation as a result of these prior convictions.