Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

The People v. Raymond Garduno Obregon

January 12, 2012

THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
RAYMOND GARDUNO OBREGON, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.



(Super. Ct. Nos. CRF102348 & CRF073877)

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

P. v. Obregon

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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

Appointed counsel for defendant Raymond Garduno Obregon has asked this court to review the record to determine whether there exist any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) We shall remand to the trial court to conduct a hearing on defendant's entitlement to additional custody credit, as we explain post, and shall otherwise affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On July 9, 2007, during a traffic stop, an officer conducted a parole search on defendant and found .35 grams of methamphetamine. Defendant was charged with transportation of methamphetamine (case No. CRF073877; Health & Saf. Code, § 11379, subd. (a)) and entered a no contest plea, admitted a prior prison term allegation (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)), and was granted Proposition 36 probation.

Within a month, defendant violated probation by failing to appear at an appointment with the probation officer as well as for his drug treatment program assessment, and by failing to register as a drug offender. Defendant did not appear at a probation revocation hearing because he was in custody on a parole violation. Upon his release after serving time on the parole violation, he admitted the probation violation allegations and was reinstated on Proposition 36 probation.

Five months later, defendant violated probation by failing to meet with his probation officer and by failing to enter and successfully complete a substance abuse treatment program. He had been discharged from Cache Creek Lodge residential program for twice recycling the facility's property and for his resistance in groups and towards staff. Defendant failed to appear at a court hearing on the allegations. When he did appear two months later, he was subject to a parole hold. He admitted the probation violation allegations and, when he was scheduled to be released from custody on the parole violation, he was ordered to report to probation. When he was released, parole placed defendant in a residential program.

Upon his release from the residential program, he violated probation by failing to contact his probation officer, failing to keep appointments, update his residence address, and make payments on his financial obligations. He also committed new offenses.

On April 8, 2010, during an argument between defendant and the woman he had been dating, he grabbed her by the face and throat and slammed her head into a car window, injuring her. Defendant was charged (in Yolo County case No. CRF102348) with assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)), dissuading a witness from reporting a crime (Pen. Code, § 136.1, subd. (c)(1)) and second degree robbery (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 212.5, subd. (c)); it was also alleged that he had served a prior prison term (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). A bench warrant was issued.

On May 12, 2010, in Sutter County, defendant was sentenced in a separate case to state prison for 16 months for possession of methamphetamine (case No. CRF101032; Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)).

In case No. CRF102348, defendant entered a plea of no contest to assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury as a nonstrike offense in exchange for the midterm sentence of three years in prison; the remaining counts were dismissed. Based on defendant's plea, the court found that defendant violated probation in case No. CRF073877. Defendant entered his plea and admissions with the understanding that he would receive a sentence of five years and eight months in prison: the midterm of three years for assault, one-third the midterm (one year) consecutive for the transportation offense, one year for the prior prison term, and one-third the midterm (eight months) consecutive for the Sutter County possession offense. The court sentenced defendant accordingly. The court awarded 126 actual days and 126 ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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