People v. Haggins CA4/1

Filed 8/31/23 P. v. Haggins CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D081876

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. SCD286869)

DAVID C. HAGGINS,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, David M. Gill, Judge. Affirmed. Gerald J. Miller, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. David C. Haggins entered into a plea agreement, under which he

pleaded guilty to grand theft (Pen. Code,1 § 487, subd. (a)) and admitted two strike priors (§ 667, subds. (b)-(i)). He was sentenced to eight months in this

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

case to be served consecutively to case Nos. SCE401916 and SCD288251. The total sentence imposed was six years eight months. After the sentencing, the prosecution filed a motion for restitution to the victim for the value of items stolen from her home. The motion requested restitution in the amount of $20,000. The court held an evidentiary hearing. During the course of that hearing, Haggins agreed to a restitution order in the requested amount. The trial court ordered restitution as part of the judgment. Haggins filed a timely notice of appeal. Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) indicating counsel has not been able to identify any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to independently review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered Haggins the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal, but he has not responded. STATEMENT OF FACTS Appellate counsel has provided an accurate summary of the evidence produced at the restitution hearing. We will utilize that summary for background purposes. A. The Testimony of the Victim. The victim, Katie F., testified that she hired a company to perform mold remediation on the second floor of her residence, during which various items in the bedroom and bathroom were required to be moved. On the first day of the work, she discovered that workers had wrapped an armoire in the bedroom closet in plastic. She then asked Haggins, who was the primary worker that she dealt with on the project, to take the plastic off, because she needed to retrieve something from the armoire. When Haggins did so, Katie