Haddad

People v. Haddad

Good Law
176 Cal. App. 4th 270·97 Cal. Rptr. 3d 477
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 7, 2009B212880California2,922 words

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…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.