legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Robles
The defendant in this case, David Robles, pleaded guilty to petty theft with a prior enumerated offense that resulted in incarceration (Pen. Code, 666; see id., 484, subd. (a)) and admitted having served a prior prison term ( 667.5, subd. (b)). The trial court sentenced him to the upper term of three years for the aggravated petty theft offense and imposed a one-year sentence for the prior prison term enhancement. It stayed execution of sentence and placed defendant on probation subject to a number of conditions, including service of 365 days in jail.
On appeal, defendant contends that some of the probation conditions the trial court imposed are invalid and that if we find his claims regarding them forfeited, counsel was ineffective for failing to raise them in the court below.
Court agree with defendant in part and disagree in part. We agree that the language of some of the probation conditions he challenges is inartfully drafted and imposes requirements on him that are constitutionally dubious or infirm. Court resolve the problem by directing the trial court to modify the language of those conditions in accordance with constitutional and state law norms. Court otherwise affirm the judgment.

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