P. v. Petty CA1/1

Filed 3/12/13 P. v. Petty CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A134686 v. JESSE JAMES PETTY, (Humboldt County Super. Ct. No. CR1100329) Defendant and Appellant.

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A134826 v. JESSE JAMES PETTY, (Humboldt County Super. Ct. No. CR1101698) Defendant and Appellant.

Pursuant to a negotiated global disposition of these two and other criminal cases, defendant and appellant Jesse Petty pleaded no contest to one felony charge and guilty to three additional felony charges. Other charges in the two cases were dismissed. After defendant was sentenced to a total term of 11 years 8 months in accordance with the terms of the agreed-to disposition, he moved to withdraw his no contest and guilty pleas on the grounds he had been confused as to the good-time/work-time credit for time served he could receive, he did not have time to discuss the credit situation with his family, and he felt pressured to accept the negotiated disposition. The trial court denied his motions. Defendant contends the court abused its discretion in doing so. We affirm.

1

BACKGROUND On January 17, 2011, defendant was reported brandishing a knife at a passerby in Garberville.1 He ran away when approached by several deputy sheriffs, disregarding an order to get on the ground. As the deputies gave chase, defendant threw objects at them, and when the deputies subdued him with a baton, he hit back. At one point, one of the deputies saw a knife in defendant‘s left hand and ordered defendant to drop it, which he did. Nevertheless, the deputy was stabbed. Eventually, defendant was subdued, although he threatened the deputy who had been stabbed and also spat on one of the deputies. On January 20, 2011, the Humboldt County District Attorney filed a criminal complaint alleging four felony counts: attempted murder of a police officer (Pen. Code, § 664, subd. (e))2; assault on an officer (§ 245, subd. (c)); exhibiting a deadly weapon to resist arrest (§ 417.8); and resisting an executive officer (§ 69). It was further alleged count 2 was a violent felony (§ 667.5, subd. (c)), and count 4 was a serious felony because of defendant‘s use of a deadly weapon (§§ 1192.7, subd. (c)(23), 12022, subd. (b)(1)). On March 8, 2011, defendant waived a preliminary hearing, and on March 16, the district attorney filed an information alleging the same four counts.. On April 1, 2011, defense counsel applied for funding to retain an expert psychologist, stating ―certain psychiatric issues may exist that may have bearing on the appropriate disposition‖ of the matter. The court granted the application and, likewise, ordered jail access for the examination. On April 19, 2011, defendant made a Faretta3request to represent himself and a hearing was scheduled for April 21. On April 21, defense counsel declared a doubt as to defendant‘s mental competence, and the court ordered an evaluation of defendant and suspended the criminal proceedings pursuant to section 1368. In the meantime, additional charges had been filed against defendant based on