legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Jackson
Claude Daniel Jackson appeals from a judgment revoking his probation and imposing an upper-term state prison sentence based on his negotiated plea of no contest to the commission of a lewd act on a child. (Pen. Code, 288, subd. (a).) Appellant claims the judgment must be reversed because (1) the condition of probation he was found to have violatedthat he not possess pornographic materialsis constitutionally and otherwise invalid, and (2) the imposition of an upper term violated his constitutional rights under Cunningham v. California (Jan. 22, 2007) U.S., 2007 WL 135687 (Cunningham).
After finding that appellant did not waive his right to challenge the probation condition, and did not need to obtain a certificate of probable cause pursuant to section 1237.5 in order to challenge the condition, Court conclude that the trial court that sentenced appellant four years ago failed to make the requisite case specific exercise of discretion as to whether the condition is reasonably related to his offense or to his future criminality, rendering it unnecessary to determine the constitutionality of that condition.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale