Filed 12/4/19 P. v. Grisham CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

THOMAS HOWARD GRISHAM,

Defendant and Appellant.

F079133

(Super. Ct. No. F18906595)

OPINION

THE COURT*

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Glenda S. Allen-Hill, Judge.

Michele A. Douglass, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

-ooOoo-

 

Appellant Thomas Howard Grisham pled no contest to stalking (Pen. Code, § 646.9, subd. (a)) and was placed on probation. After he violated his probation a second time, the court sentenced Grisham to prison. Following independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we affirm.

PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND

On September 17, 2018, while prohibited from contacting the confidential victim (CV) by an active restraining order, Grisham went to the CV’s house at around 12:00 a.m., knocked on her window, and yelled for her to come out. Grisham also sent texts to the CV’s roommate, threatening to kill the CV or inflict great bodily injury on her. Later that morning when police responded to a call that the CV’s car had been vandalized, the CV showed them a video of Grisham on a prior occasion knocking on her window and peering inside. The CV also told the officer she had seen Grisham with a shotgun and a rifle and she and her roommate told them Grisham’s behavior had become increasingly bizarre and violent.

On September 20, 2018, when Grisham called the CV’s roommate, he was angry because the roommate had allowed the police to see his threatening text messages. Grisham pleaded with the roommate to tell the police she fabricated the messages so he would not get in trouble. Grisham was arrested on September 25, 2018.

On September 27, 2018, the Fresno County District Attorney filed a complaint charging Grisham with stalking in violation of a restraining order (§ 646.9, subd. (b)/ count 1), dissuading a witness (§ 136.1, subd. (b)(2)/count 2), and contempt of court in a pending case (§ 166, subd. (c)(1)/count 3), a misdemeanor.

On October 11, 2018, count one was amended to charge Grisham with stalking in violation of section 646.9, subdivision (a) and Grisham pled no contest to that charge in exchange for the dismissal of the two remaining counts. Grisham’s negotiated plea also provided he would receive a grant of probation and be released from custody to an inpatient drug rehabilitation program.

On November 7, 2018, the court suspended imposition of sentence and placed Grisham on probation for three years on condition he serve a year in local custody. The court also ordered Grisham to enroll in and complete the Salvation Army drug treatment program, a domestic violence program, and a 52-week batterer’s program and to report to probation within two days of being released from custody.

On January 23, 2019, the probation department filed a probation hearing report alleging Grisham violated his probation by being out of contact with the department since November 9, 2018, self-discharging from the drug treatment program, violating the criminal protective order then in effect, and being arrested on a new criminal charge. After Grisham admitted all the allegations, the court again ordered him to serve a year in local custody and participate in the Salvation Army drug treatment program, once space became available.

On January 25, 2019, Grisham was released to the Salvation Army drug treatment program.

On March 13, 2019, the probation department filed a second probation hearing report alleging Grisham violated his probation by leaving the Salvation Army drug treatment program on February 8, 2019, not returning, and being dropped from the program. Grisham admitted the allegations that day and the court sentenced him to the low term of 16 months.

On April 11, 2019, Grisham filed a timely appeal.

Grisham’s appellate counsel has filed a brief that summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Grisham has not responded to this court’s invitation to submit additional briefing. However, Grisham’s abstract of judgment, in section 1, erroneously describes his conviction as “Stalking Restraining Order,” which is a violation of section 646.9, subdivision (b), rather than section 646.9, subdivision (a). We will direct the trial court to issue an amended abstract of judgment that corrects this error.

Following an independent review of the record, we find that no reasonably arguable factual or legal issues exist.

DISPOSITION

The trial court is directed to issue an amended abstract of judgment that in section 1 describes Grisham’s offense as, “Stalking,” and to forward a certified copy to the appropriate authorities. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.