People v. Gibson CA3

Filed 2/26/24 P. v. Gibson CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sutter) ----

THE PEOPLE, C099155

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CRF23- 0000384) v.

JONATHAN RICHARD GIBSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Jonathan Richard Gibson asked this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant filed a supplemental brief and claims he received ineffective assistance of counsel in the trial court. Having reviewed defendant’s arguments and finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment without prejudice to defendant raising his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel by way of a petition for writ of habeas corpus.

1

BACKGROUND On February 17, 2023, law enforcement responded to a fire at a veterinary hospital. One of the officers saw defendant in the area of the fire and stopped him. The officer found a Zippo-style torch lighter on defendant and saw that defendant’s hands were black and ashy; defendant smelled of smoke. An employee of the hospital told the officer that she saw defendant at the fire. Defendant denied setting the fire, saying he was only there to watch the fire until the fire department arrived. Defendant was arrested and charged with arson (Pen. Code, § 451, subd. (c)) and misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia (Health & Saf. Code, § 11364, subd. (a)). The People further alleged defendant was twice previously convicted of strike offenses (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12). The parties subsequently entered a negotiated plea agreement resolving this as well as several other cases. In the negotiated, global resolution, the People dropped the strike allegations and defendant pleaded no contest to arson in exchange for the upper term of six years (he faced a maximum sentence of 15 years four months). The People also agreed defendant’s sentence would run concurrent to his sentence in three other pending cases, a fourth case would be dismissed, and charges in a fifth case would be reduced to misdemeanors.1 In exchange for the stipulated term, defendant also stipulated to several aggravating factors. The trial court imposed the agreed-upon sentence along with various fines and fees. The trial court also awarded defendant 296 days of custody credits. Defendant filed his own notice of appeal and requested a certificate of probable cause. The trial court denied defendant’s request for a certificate of probable cause.