People v. Saiz CA3

Filed 4/29/21 P. v. Saiz CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Butte) ----

THE PEOPLE, C091818

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. 19CF01357, 19CM04747) v.

MIGUEL ENRIQUE SAIZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Miguel Enrique Saiz asked this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Our review has determined we lack appellate jurisdiction over defendant’s appeal, and we will transfer it to the appellate division of the superior court. We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)

1

BACKGROUND This appeal concerns two separate cases. In the first, case No. 19CF01357, deputies searched defendant outside a convenience store and found a large amount of marijuana in a duffle bag and a shotgun shell in his pocket. The prosecution filed a complaint alleging one count of possession of ammunition (Pen. Code, § 30305, subd. (a)(1); undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code) and one count of possession of more than 28.5 grams of marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11357, subd. (b)(2)). Defendant then failed to appear for a hearing, resulting in case No. 19CM04747, in which the prosecution filed a complaint alleging one misdemeanor count of failing to appear. (§ 1320, subd. (a).) The prosecution also specially alleged defendant was released from custody on bail or his own recognizance at the time of the offense. (§ 12022.1.) In case No. 19CF01357, the prosecution amended the complaint to reduce the possession of ammunition count to a misdemeanor and defendant pleaded no contest to both counts. In case No. 19CM04747, defendant pleaded no contest to the failure to appear count, and the special allegation was dismissed. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced defendant to a one-year term in case No. 19CF01357 and a six-month term in case No. 19CM04747. Both terms were to run concurrently with a three year sentence the court imposed in a separate felony case. For each case, the court imposed a $150 restitution fine (§ 1202.4), and for each count, the court imposed a $40 court operations assessment (§ 1465.8) and a $30 conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373). The court waived the presentencing investigation report fee and public defender fees based on defendant’s ability to pay. The trial court granted defendant a certificate of probable cause and defendant filed a notice of appeal.