P. v. Peralta CA1/3 filed
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Filed 3/9/11 P. v. Peralta CA1/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A129496 v. (City & County of San Francisco Super. Ct. No. 2285452) DENIS PERALTA, Defendant and Appellant. Defendant Denis Peralta appeals from orders of the trial court revoking his probation and sentencing him to three years in state prison for his March 2007 conviction of assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury. His counsel has asked this court for an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Because defendant did not request a certificate of probable cause, our examination of the record is limited to matters occurring after the plea was entered, i.e., the revocation of probation and the imposition of sentence. Defendant was notified of his right to file a supplemental brief, but has not done so. Upon independent review of the record, we conclude that no arguable issues are presented for review and affirm the judgment. Background On March 2, 2007, defendant pled guilty to one count of assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury. Imposition of sentence was suspended and defendant was placed on probation for three years. Defendant s probation was revoked and reinstated in May 2007, February 2008 and February 2010. 1 On April 28, 2010, the district attorney filed another motion to revoke defendant s probation based on his arrest for vandalism, resisting an officer and attempted robbery. At a contested hearing on July 6, a police officer testified that he saw defendant and another suspect hitting a man lying on the ground. The men ran when the officer approached and told them to stop. The officer chased defendant into a backyard where he was eventually arrested. The victim identified defendant at the time of his arrest as one of the men who attacked him. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court revoked defendant s probation. The court imposed the midterm sentence of three years on the original assault conviction. Defendant was awarded 141 days actual custody credit and 70 days credit under Penal Code section 4019. Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal. While this appeal was pending, defendant filed a request in the trial court to correct an error in the calculation of his custody credits under Penal Code section 4019. The court granted the request and awarded defendant an additional 70 days credit under section 4019. The court s order also amended the abstract of judgment to reflect the proper 281 total days credit. The appellate record was augmented to reflect entry of this order. Discussion Substantial evidence supports the finding that defendant violated the terms and conditions of probation. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to reinstate defendant s probation for a fourth time. Nor did the court err in imposing the three-year prison sentence. Defendant s custody credits, as modified by the December order, were properly calculated. Defendant was adequately represented by counsel throughout the proceedings. 2 Disposition The judgment is affirmed. _________________________ Pollak, J. We concur: _________________________ McGuiness, P. J. _________________________ Jenkins, J. 3 A129496 4
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
