People v. Martin CA5

Filed 5/24/22 P. v. Martin CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, F083333 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Kings Super. Ct. No. 21CS0046) v.

CHRISTOPHER T. MARTIN, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kings County. Valerie R. Chrissakis, Judge. William Paul Melcher, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Hill, P. J., Franson, J. and Meehan, J.

INTRODUCTION Appellant and defendant Christopher Martin was found in violation of his Post Release Community Supervision (PRCS), ordered to serve local time, and reinstated on PRCS. On appeal, his appellate counsel has filed a brief that summarizes the facts with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Conviction and Sentence On August 24, 2018, appellant was convicted of violating Penal Code section 273.5, subdivision (a), willful infliction of corporal injury to a spouse or cohabitant, in the Superior Court of Kings County case No. 21CS0046; he was sentenced to three years in prison. On March 15, 2021, appellant was released from state prison and placed on PRCS. The terms and conditions of his PRCS status included to “comply with all the instruction of your supervising county agency representative,” and to not have any contact with the victim. Petition to Revoke PRCS On July 22, 2021, the probation department filed a petition seeking to revoke appellant’s status on PRCS in case No. 21CS0046. The petition alleged that on July 21, 2021, appellant was contacted at a Corcoran apartment, the victim was seen exiting the same apartment, and appellant failed to enroll and complete a batterer’s program as instructed by the probation department. Hearing on the PRCS Violation On August 18, 2021, the court held a contested evidentiary hearing on the two petitions alleging PRCS violations in case No. 21CS0046 and companion case No. 21CS0047.

2.