People v. Harris CA3
Filed 3/18/21 P. v. Harris CA3 Opinion following transfer from Supreme Court NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Butte) ----
THE PEOPLE, C088730
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 17CF02288)
v. OPINION ON TRANSFER
CLARENCE EDWARD HARRIS,
Defendant and Appellant.
Defendant Clarence Edward Harris pleaded no contest to possession of a controlled substance with a firearm and was placed on three years’ probation. On appeal, he challenges the electronics search term imposed for probation, contending the condition is facially overbroad. He also asserts court-imposed fines and fees should be stricken because he has no ability to pay them, relying on People v. Dueñas (2019) 30 Cal.App.5th 1157 (Dueñas). In our original opinion, we rejected both contentions and affirmed. Thereafter, the Supreme Court granted defendant’s petition for review and
1
ultimately transferred the matter to this court with directions to vacate our prior decision and reconsider the cause in light of Assembly Bill No. 1950 (2019-2020 Reg. Sess.). In light of Assembly Bill No. 1950, we shall reverse the three-year term of probation and the court on remand must impose a term of probation not to exceed two years. BACKGROUND Narcotics investigators searched defendant, his vehicle, and a passenger during a traffic stop while defendant was on probation. The investigators found heroin, counterfeit and real cash, pills, a firearm, ammunition, and drug paraphernalia. Investigators also found several cell phones which were later shown to have text messages indicative of drug sales. Defendant was charged with four felony counts: concealed firearm in a vehicle (Pen. Code, § 25400, subd. (a)(3)), possession for sale of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351), sale/transportation/offering to sell a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (a)), and possession of a controlled substance with a firearm (Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.1, subd. (a)). Defendant pleaded no contest to possession with a firearm and the prosecution dismissed the three remaining counts. At sentencing, the court suspended imposition of sentence and granted three years’ probation. Under special conditions of probation No. 65 (Probation Condition 65), defendant provided consent for any law enforcement agency to seize and examine electronic data stored in devices owned, operated, or controlled by defendant.1 The court
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)