People v. Wade CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 14, 2014G050014California615 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

Orange County Deputy Probation Officer Rodney Grantham was assigned to provide Wade postrelease community supervision. Wade was indoctrinated regarding the terms and conditions of his postrelease community supervision. He was told he needed to notify his probation officer in advance of a change of residence and any anticipated change of residence. As part of his supervision, Grantham directed Wade to go to the Phoenix House Residential Drug Treatment Program (Phoenix House). Wade entered the program on December 20, 2013. Grantham visited Wade while he was in residence at the Phoenix House on January 6, 2014. After that date, Gratham was at the Phoenix House to see other parolees under his supervision but never saw Wade there.

2 On the afternoon of January 28, 2014, Grantham went to the residence address Wade had provided in his file and attempted to make contact with Wade. Grantham was not able to contact Wade at the residence. Grantham made no other attempts to contact Wade. After his indoctrination, Wade never notified Grantham of a change of address. On February 7, 2014, a warrant was issued for Wade’s arrest based on the fact his whereabouts were unknown. On February…

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.