People v. Deoliveirapaiva CA1/5

Filed 6/16/23 P. v. Deoliveirapaiva CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A166103 v. JEAN DEOLIVEIRAPAIVA, (City and County of San Francisco Super. Ct. No. Defendant and Appellant. SCN233585 and CRI20013482)

Jean Deoliveirapaiva appeals from a post-conviction order that revoked his probation on the ground that he violated its terms. His attorney has filed a brief seeking our independent review of the appellate record, pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), to determine whether there is any arguable issue on appeal. We will dismiss the appeal. I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY A. Initial Conviction and Sentence A complaint filed in December 2020 charged appellant with second- degree burglary of a vehicle (Pen. Code, § 459), receiving or buying stolen property (§ 496, subd. (a)), and possession of burglar tools (§ 466). 1

1 All statutory references hereafter are to the Penal Code. Appellant was initially charged as “Jean P. Paiva” but informed the trial court that his true name is Jean Deoliveirapaiva.

1

In January 2021, appellant pleaded guilty to violating section 459, and the remaining counts were dismissed. In May 2021, the court suspended imposition of sentence and placed appellant on probation for two years. He was ordered to serve 36 days in county jail, with 36 days credit for time served. Probation conditions included obeying all laws, completing treatment programs identified by the probation department, checking in with probation within 72 hours of being released from custody, “maintain[ing] good contact” with his probation officer, and not knowingly possessing any firearm. Appellant was ordered to pay restitution in an amount determined by the probation department; he was also ordered to pay fines and fees, but the collection of those amounts was suspended due to his inability to pay them. B. Revocation and Reinstatement of Probation in 2021 The probation department filed a motion to revoke appellant’s probation in June 2021, alleging that he failed to report to probation and, on June 13, 2021, committed felonies and misdemeanors in San Bruno, including possession of a stolen vehicle (§ 496d, subd. (a)), possession of a firearm by a felon (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1)), and receiving stolen property (§ 496, subd. (a)). Another motion to revoke probation on the same grounds was filed on July 7, 2021. On September 16, 2021, appellant admitted violating probation, and the court reinstated probation on the same terms and conditions, with a termination date of May 16, 2023. C. Revocation of Probation at Issue in This Appeal On December 15, 2021, the probation department filed a motion to revoke appellant’s probation based on an arrest by the San Mateo Police Department on November 23, 2021. Probation was summarily revoked.