1

Filed 3/6/24 P. v. Leslie CA1/1

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or

or dered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. BURGESS ALEXANDER LESLIE,
Defendant and Appellant. A168878

(Mendocino County Super. Ct. No. SCUK

- CRCR

- 2015

- 82336

- 3)

Burgess Alexander Leslie appealed after the trial court imposed a

previously suspended prison sentence because he violated the terms of his

probation . His appel late attorney has asked the court for an independent

review of the record under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. We find no

arguable issues and affirm.

Leslie pleaded guilty in February 2019 to one count of felony assault by

means of force likely to cause great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245,

subd. (a)(4)) 1 and one count of misdemeanor marijuana cultivation (Health &

Saf. Code, § 11358, subd. (c)) in connection with a confrontation between his

girlfriend and another man in July 2015

. The trial court granted Leslie three

years’ probation with the condition that he serve 360 days in jail

.

1 All undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.2

The probation department first accused Leslie of violating the terms of

his probation in June 2019 by failing to surrender himself to the jail the

previo us month as ordered

. The trial court revoked probation pending a

hearing. Leslie was arrested in September 2020, and he was remanded to

serve the time previously ordered. He admitted the probation violation at a

hearing in January 2021

. At the sentenci ng hearing in March 2021, t he trial

court imposed an aggravated term of four years, suspe nd ed imposition of

sentence, and reinstated probation on the condition that Leslie complete a

minimum six

- month residential treatment program.

Leslie apparently lef

t the residential

- treatment program the same day

he was admitted and, in August 2021

, the probation department filed a

petition alleging the violation of probation. Leslie’s whereabouts were

unknown until he was arrested in July 2023. Leslie later admitt ed to the

allegations of the revocation petition , and the trial court permanently

revoked Leslie’s probation

. Because of changes to sentencing law enacted after Leslie was most

recently placed on probation, the trial court elected to impose the midterm of

three years for Leslie’s assault conviction (§ 245, subd. (a)(4)), with a

concurrent 180 days for his marijuana

- cultivation conviction (Health & Saf.

Code, § 11358, subd. (c)). The court also imposed the minimum restitution

fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)) p lus a $300 probation

- revocation fine (§ 1202.44 ),

and it imposed but stayed a $300 parole

- revocation fine (§ 1202.45).

Reviewing the record of Leslie’s sentence and other matters occurring

after Leslie’s admission of probation violation that do not affe ct his sentence

(Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b)(2)(B)), we find no arguable issues, as the

sentence and fines and fees imposed were authorized.

The judgment is affirmed.3 _________________________ Humes, P. J.

WE CONCUR:

_________________________ Banke, J.

_________________________ Langhorn e Wilson, J.

People v. Leslie A168878