People v. Leal CA3

Filed 8/30/21 P. v. Leal CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Yuba) ----

THE PEOPLE, C092133

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CRF1801278)

v.

STANLEY JOHN LEAL,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant was charged with vandalism in an amount over $400; misdemeanor driving under the influence of an alcoholic beverage; misdemeanor hit and run resulting in property damage; and misdemeanor resisting, delaying, or obstructing an officer. On July 25, 2018, defendant pled no contest to the vandalism and driving under the influence charges. In exchange, the court dismissed the remaining charges. Under the agreement, imposition of sentence was suspended to afford defendant the opportunity to complete a six-month residential drug treatment program. If defendant successfully completed the program, he would be given probation with a possible jail term condition of up to 365 days. If he failed, he agreed to be sentenced to the upper term of three years in state prison. The factual basis for defendant’s plea was found in Marysville Police Department Report No. 1807-1168.

1

According to the People, defendant had been involved in a minor traffic accident, fled the scene, and in an attempt to get away from authorities, broke three windows of an apartment, each valued at $150. Defendant had been under the influence of alcohol at the time. After some discussion, defendant ultimately stipulated to the factual basis. Defendant was released from custody on August 2, 2018, for participation in the San Francisco Salvation Army Adult Rehabilitation Center. On October 9, 2018, the court issued a bench warrant for defendant’s arrest since he absconded from treatment on September 29, 2018. Following defendant’s arrest, the court denied defendant’s Marsden1 motion and afforded defendant a second opportunity to complete a six-month residential treatment program. In exchange, defendant agreed to waive his accrued custody credits. Defendant again acknowledged that failure to complete the program would result in imposition of the upper term of three years in prison. On January 9, 2019, defendant was released from custody to attend residential treatment. However, defendant again absconded from treatment, and the court issued a warrant for his arrest on January 18, 2019. He was arrested and the court denied defendant’s second Marsden motion. At the next hearing, defendant asked to withdraw his plea, resulting in appointment of conflict counsel, who ultimately reported there was no basis for plea withdrawal. Apparently dissatisfied with this conclusion, defendant filed a pro. per. petition for habeas corpus and related papers arguing he had received ineffective assistance of counsel prior to his no contest plea, which the court denied on March 2, 2020. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed the upper term of three years for the vandalism charge and sentenced defendant to 180 days concurrent on the driving under the influence of an alcoholic beverage violation. The court also imposed a $300