PEOPLE v. MICAH BENJAMIN MINOR
Filed 9/8/10
CERTIFIED
FOR PUBLICATION
IN THE COURT OF
APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE
DISTRICT
(Butte)
----
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
MICAH BENJAMIN MINOR,
Defendant and Appellant.
C057609
(Super.
Ct. No. CM020547)
STORY CONTINUE
FROM PART I….
The approach taken by the court in >Skipworth has been applied in
later federal cases. (See >United States v. Carey (8th Cir. 1977)
565 F.2d 545, 547 [â€
Description | In this appeal, we consider the question of how much process is due a probationer in a probation extension proceeding. Defendant appeals an order granting a probation officer's request to extend by two years a three-year period of probation imposed following defendant's no contest plea to unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. (Pen. Code, § 261.5, subd. (c).)[1] The request was made in a probation progress report to the court, which detailed defendant's failure to make progress in a sex offender therapy program mandated as a condition of probation. Defendant argues that a probationer in an extension proceeding is entitled to the same rights that obtain in a probation revocation proceeding and asserts that his federal due process rights of notice, confrontation, and factual findings were violated. Court disagree with his initial premise and shall conclude that defendant was provided adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard prior to the extension of his probation, and that his rights of procedural due process were not violated in any respect. We also find adequate support in the record for the court's order extending probation. Court affirm. |
Rating |