1

Filed 7/17/ 24 P. v. Roberts CA1/4

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or or dered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOU R

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.
M ICHAEL LAWRENCE ROBERTS

, Defendant and Appellant. A16 6838

(S an Mateo County Super. Ct. No. 22

- SF

- 000551

- A

)

M ichael Lawrence Roberts appeals from his sentence of t wo years in
state prison after a contested probation revocation hearing. R obert s ’s
appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979 ) 25 Cal.3d
436 ( Wende )

, summarizing the facts and procedural history and request ing
this court to independently review the record to identify any issues
warranting review. Roberts was advised of his right to file a supplemental

brief but has not done so. Finding no arguable issues on appeal, w e affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On October 2 1, 2022 , the trial court held a contested probation
revocation hearing in C ase No. 22

- SF

- 000551

- A

. During the hearing, the
trial court took judicial notice of three misdemeanor convictions ( two violations of Health and Safety Code section 11364 (counts one and three)2

and one violation of Health and Safety Code section 11377 , subdivi sion (a)
(count two)) entered against Roberts on October 17, 2022

, in Case No. 22

- SM

009458

- A. 1 On the basis of the three misdemeanor convictions, the trial court

found Roberts in violat ion of the terms and conditions of his probation in

Case No. 22

- SF

- 000551

- A , which included an order to obey all laws

. The trial

court terminated Roberts ’s probation and sentenced him to the mitigated
term of two years in state prison on the underlying violation of Penal Code

section 245, subdivision (a)(4). The trial court awarded Roberts 179 days of

credit for time served and 178 days of conduct credit for a total of 357 days of

credit.
On December 12, 2022, Roberts filed a timely notice of appeal.

DISCUSSION

R obert s ’s counsel filed a Wende brief on May 31 , 2024

. We have
received no supplement al filing by R oberts

. R oberts ’s notice of appeal is from

a n order revoking his probation and therefore is appealable as an order made
after judgment affecting his substantial right s

. ( Pen. Code

, § 1237, subd. (b);
People v. Vickers (1972) 8 Cal.3d 451, 453

, fn. 2.) The trial court’s probation
hearing and sentence were appropriately supported by the evidence and
without any indication of an abuse of discretion. After reviewing the entire
record on appeal pursuant to Wende

, supra , 25 Cal.3d 436, we find no issues

1 At the time of the revocation hearing, the three misdemeanor conviction s had not become final and were pending appeal in the San Mateo Superior Court, Appellate Division. On December 22, 2023, Roberts filed a

p etition to t ransfer his a ppeal from the Appellate Division to this court. On January 2, 2024, this court denied that petition

, but on its own motion stayed the briefing in this appeal pending the decision of the Appellate Division and order ed Appellant’s Opening Brief due no later than 30 days after issuance of the Appellate Division’s decision

. On May 28, 20 24, the Appellate Division issued its decision affirming the three misdemeanor convictions. Thereafter, Roberts filed his Wende brief

.3

requiring further briefing.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

HITE, J. *

We concur:

BROWN, P. J. STREETER, J.

People v. Roberts (A 166838)

* Judge of the Superior Court of California, City and County of San Francisco, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.