People v. Jackson CA1/2

Filed 9/22/22 P. v. Jackson CA1/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A162659 v. BAKARI BILAL JACKSON, (Contra Costa County Super. Ct. Nos. 5-191723-6; 2- Defendant and Appellant. 330678-4; 2-331222-0)

Defendant Bakari Bilal Jackson appeals from orders finding him not competent to stand trial and committing him to the Department of State Hospitals pursuant to Penal Code section 1367 et seq.1 His appointed counsel has filed a brief raising no issues, asking us to independently review the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), or, alternatively, to exercise our discretion to retain the appeal as prescribed in Conservatorship of Ben C. (2007) 40 Cal.4th 529 (Ben C.). Although Wende review is not mandated, our discretionary review of the record reveals no meritorious issues for briefing. We affirm. BACKGROUND In October 2017, Jackson was convicted of assault by means of force

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

likely to produce great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(4)) and sentenced to three years in prison. Jackson was released on postrelease community supervision (PRCS) under various terms and conditions, including that he report to the probation department as directed and refrain from criminal conduct. Jackson allegedly violated PRCS on several occasions. On September 5, 2019, the District Attorney filed a complaint under case No. 2-330678-4 charging Jackson with assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)), with sentence enhancements and other sentencing allegations. On that same day, the probation department petitioned to revoke Jackson’s PRCS, alleging he had violated the terms of his PRCS by committing the assault charged in case No. 2-330678-4 and doing so as a “hate crime” (§ 422.7), as well as by repeatedly failing to report to probation. The petition proceedings were docketed under case No. 5-191723-6. The above two matters had not been formally consolidated but were being litigated together.2 In those matters, the trial court twice conducted