Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

The People v. Kevin Leslie Cadle

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Shasta)


September 12, 2011

THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
KEVIN LESLIE CADLE, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.

(Super. Ct. Nos. 03F5916, 08F4932, 10F7038)

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Nicholson , J.

P. v. Cadle

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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

This is an appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).

In April 2003, the victim, defendant Kevin Leslie Cadle, and two other people went to bars to play pool and drink and ended up in the apartment of one of the foursome. The victim was intoxicated, became ill, and then passed out. When she woke up, defendant was having sexual intercourse with her. She pushed him off and passed out again.

In case No. 03F5916 (2003 case), defendant entered a plea of guilty to rape by use of drugs (Pen. Code, § 261, subd. (a)(3); undesignated section references are to this code). In December 2003, the court imposed the upper term of eight years, suspended execution of sentence and granted probation for a term of seven years.

In June 2008, officers conducting a registration compliance check at defendant's home found two homemade billy clubs. Defendant claimed he used them for protection.

In case No. 08F4932 (2008 case), defendant entered a negotiated plea of guilty to possession of a deadly weapon (§ 12020, subd. (a)) and admitted violating probation in the 2003 case in exchange for dismissal of a strike prior and a sentencing lid of eight years eight months for the two cases.

In September 2008, the court suspended imposition of sentence and granted probation for a term of three years in the 2008 case. The court reinstated probation in the 2003 case.

On September 30, 2010, a complaint filed in case No. 10F7038 (2010 case) charged defendant with failure to report a change of address to law enforcement (§ 290.013), failure to update registration annually (§ 290.012), and resisting an officer, a misdemeanor (§ 148, subd. (a)(1)). A strike prior was also alleged.

On September 30, 2010, petitions for violation of probation in both the 2003 and 2008 cases alleged that defendant failed to register, resisted an officer, failed to provide an update to his registration to the probation officer, and failed to report to the probation officer.

On October 29, 2010, petitions for violation of probation in both the 2003 and 2008 cases alleged that defendant tested positive for the use of marijuana on October 1, 2010, and methadone and marijuana on October 13, 2010.

On November 2, 2010, petitions for violation of probation in both the 2003 and 2008 cases alleged that defendant failed to report to the probation officer, committed spousal abuse, and falsely imprisoned his spouse.

On November 10, 2010, petitions for violation of probation in both the 2003 and 2008 cases alleged that defendant used morphine and marijuana on October 28, 2010.

On December 13, 2010, defendant admitted violating probation in the 2003 and 2008 cases as alleged in all petitions (except the allegation that he failed to register in the petitions filed Sept. 30, 2010) in exchange for a sentence of eight years in the 2003 case and a concurrent three year term in the 2008 case. The 2010 case was dismissed.

The court sentenced defendant accordingly.

Defendant appeals.

We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: BLEASE , Acting P. J. DUARTE , J.

20110912

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.