Filed 12/8/20 P. v. Higginson CA2/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for 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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

THEODORE HIGGINSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

B301825

(Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. MA071820)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los 

Angeles County, Kathleen Blanchard, Judge. Affirmed.

Michele A. Douglass, under appointment by the Court of 

Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_________________________
2

Pursuant to a negotiated plea, defendant and appellant 

Theodore Higginson pled no contest to violation of Penal Code 

section 245, subdivision (a)(4).

1 After he violated the terms of his 

probation, the trial court imposed the agreed-upon term of three 

years in prison. We affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND2

On the morning of June 27, 2017, Higginson, armed with a 

gun, pounded on the windows of Lenntine Futch’s house. He 

threatened to “knock out [her] windows” and “come in there and 

fuck all of you all up.” Higginson had previously attempted to 

hurt Futch and her nephew. Futch was afraid for her life.

On the evening of July 27, 2017, Richard Williams was 

walking near an intersection in Lancaster when Higginson, 

driving a sport utility vehicle, sped towards him. Williams 

jumped out of the way to avoid being hit by the car. Higginson 

then threatened Williams, saying, “I’m gonna beat you up, 

mother fucker.” Williams took off running, and Higginson said, 

“I’m going to kill you.”

In an information filed on September 22, 2017, Higginson 

was charged with making criminal threats against Futch while 

armed with a firearm (§§ 422, subd. (a), 12022, subd. (a)(1), 

count 1) and assault with a deadly weapon against Williams 

(§ 245, subd. (a)(1), count 2). The information alleged, as to both 

offenses, that Higginson had suffered two prior serious or violent 

1 All further undesignated statutory references are to the 

Penal Code.

2 Because Higginson pled no contest before trial, we derive 

the facts from the preliminary hearing transcript.
3

felony convictions. (§§ 667, subds. (a), (b)–(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)–

(d).)

In May 2018, the information was amended to add a third 

count of assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily 

injury. (§ 245, subd. (a)(4), count 3.) Pursuant to a negotiated 

disposition, Higginson pled no contest to count 3. In accordance 

with the plea bargain, the trial court imposed the middle term of 

three years in prison, but suspended execution of the sentence 

and placed Higginson on formal probation for three years. The 

terms of Higginson’s probation required, among other things,

that he attend three months of anger management counseling 

and serve 364 days in jail with credit for 525 days served. The 

court dismissed the two remaining counts. It imposed a 

restitution fine of $300, a suspended parole revocation restitution 

fine in the same amount, a $40 court operations assessment, and 

a $30 criminal conviction assessment.

On February 15, 2019, Higginson was arrested for 

assaulting his former girlfriend, Porschea Alley. As a result, he 

was charged in a new case, no. MA075715. His probation was 

revoked in the instant case and the matter was set for a 

probation violation hearing.

On April 24, 2019, defense counsel expressed concern about 

Higginson’s competency. The trial court asked Higginson a series 

of questions, concluded he was “lucid and oriented,” and declined 

to declare a doubt. 

On May 17, 2019, the trial court held the probation 

violation hearing. Alley testified that she and Higginson had 

dated for approximately seven years and had an infant daughter 

together, but were no longer in a relationship. In the early 

morning hours of February 15, 2019, Alley and Higginson were 
4

outside Alley’s apartment, talking. According to Alley’s 

statements to a police officer, she and Higginson argued. He 

yelled, “Bitch, let me get my daughter,” and threatened to kill 

her. He started his car and drove toward her. She ran toward 

her apartment and jumped out of the way to avoid being hit by 

the car. When Higginson stopped the vehicle, it was less than 

five feet away from the concrete steps leading to her apartment. 

Alley believed he was going to run over her with the car.

At the probation violation hearing, Alley testified that she 

had refused to let Higginson take the baby because she disliked a 

woman who was at his home that evening. She called police and 

falsely told them that Higginson tried to run her over because she 

was angry that he had been cheating on her, and “wanted to get 

him in trouble for having a girl over there. . . .” She admittedly 

requested an emergency protective order.

The trial court did not credit Alley’s testimony that she had 

lied to the officer, and found Higginson in violation of his 

probation.

After a break in the proceedings, Higginson pled no contest 

to making criminal threats in violation of section 422 in the Alley 

case, no. MA075715. At a subsequent sentencing hearing, the 

trial court terminated probation and ordered the three-year 

sentence imposed in the instant case executed, to be served 

concurrently with the sentence in case no. MA075715. It 

awarded Higginson 940 days of custody credit.

Higginson timely appealed.

DISCUSSION

After review of the record, Higginson’s court-appointed 

counsel filed an opening brief that raised no issues, and 

requested that this court conduct an independent review of the 
5

record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. 

Appellant was advised that he had 30 days to submit by brief or 

letter any contentions or argument he wished this court to 

consider. We have received no response.

We have examined the record, and are satisfied no arguable 

issues exist and Higginson’s attorney has fully complied with the 

responsibilities of counsel. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 

125–126; People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at pp. 443.)

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL 

REPORTS

EDMON, P. J.

We concur:

EGERTON, J.

DHANIDINA, J.