People v. Sartain CA3

Opinion

Filed 8/6/26 P. v. Sartain CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Shasta)

THE PEOPLE, C104270 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. 23F0763, v. 24F2710)

JOSHUA DAVID SARTAIN, Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Joshua David Sartain filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of this case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (See People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) Finding no arguable errors that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment. I. BACKGROUND In 2022, while being processed at a jail, a police officer asked defendant whether he possessed any drugs, paraphernalia, alcohol, or weapons on his person. Defendant responded, “No.” During a body scan, officers discovered two baggies inside defendant’s pants, one appearing to contain fentanyl and the other appearing to contain methamphetamine.

1 The People charged defendant in case No. 23F0763 with bringing an illegal substance into a jail facility (Pen. Code, § 4573.5).1 Defendant pled guilty to this offense. The trial court sentenced defendant to two years’ probation. In January 2024, the probation department petitioned for revocation of probation, alleging defendant failed to report to his probation officer. Defendant admitted the probation violation. The trial court revoked probation, reinstated it, and ordered defendant to serve 60 days in county jail. In February 2024, authorities investigated a fire that had occurred on the lawn area at the rear of a business. Surveillance footage showed defendant starting the fire. When defendant was later found, he said he started the fire because he was cold. The People charged defendant in case No. 24F2710 with arson of another’s property (§ 451, subd. (d)). The People later added a charge of unlawfully causing a fire of a structure or forest land (§ 452, subd. (c)). Defendant pled no contest to that added charge and admitted to a violation of probation in case No. 23F0763. The trial court revoked and reinstated probation in case No. 23F0763, placed defendant on two years’ probation in case no. 24F2710, and ordered defendant to serve 220 days in county jail. In October 2024, the probation department petitioned for the revocation of probation in both cases, alleging defendant failed to report to his probation officer. Defendant admitted to the violations of probation. The trial court revoked probation in both cases and sentenced defendant to two years (the middle term) for bringing an illegal substance into a jail facility and a concurrent term of two years (the middle term) for unlawfully causing a fire of a structure or forest land. Defendant timely appealed without requesting a certificate of probable cause.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

2 II. DISCUSSION Appointed counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts and procedural history of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (See Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days from the date the opening brief was filed. More than 30 days have elapsed, and defendant has not filed a supplemental brief. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record pursuant to Wende, we find no arguable errors that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment. III. DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.

/S/ RENNER, J.

We concur:

/S/ HULL, Acting P. J.

/S/ WISEMAN, J.* * Retired Associate Justice of the Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.