Haddad
People v. Haddad
Opinion
Opinion
Defendant, Ousama Saadeh Haddad, pled guilty to methamphetamine possession (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)); marijuana possession (Health & Saf. Code, § 11357, subd. (b)); and being under the influence of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11550, subd. (a)). Defendant appeals from a subsequent probation revocation order. Defendant argues he was found in violation of probation based upon a drug-related offense; therefore, he was improperly denied the opportunity to participate in probation pursuant to Penal Code [1] section 1210.1. This is commonly referred to as Proposition 36 probation. We affirm.
We view the evidence in a light most favorable to the judgment. ( Jackson v. Virginia (1979) 443 U.S. 307, 319 [ 61 L.Ed.2d 560 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 ]; People v. Elliot (2005) 37 Cal.4th 453 , 466 [ 35 Cal.Rptr.3d 759 , 122 P.3d 968 ]; Taylor v. Stainer (9th Cir. 1994) 31 F.3d 907, 908-909 .) On July 29, 2008, defendant was stopped while riding a bicycle. Defendant was agitated and fidgety, had rapid speech, and his pupils were constricted. Defendant admitted he had used methamphetamine that morning. After defendant was arrested, two baggies containing 1…