legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Heard
Jeremy Heard appeals from a judgment convicting him of numerous counts of prohibited practice by a mortgage foreclosure consultant and forgery arising from his operation of a company that purported to assist homeowners whose residences were in foreclosure. He argues the prohibited practice counts (based on his acquisition of an interest in the residences) must be reversed because (1) the statute of limitations had expired for these counts, and (2) the prosecution did not establish that the residences were still in foreclosure at the time he acquired an interest in them. He also argues the forgery counts must be reversed because (1) the evidence does not support that the charged misconduct constituted forgery, and (2) the trial court failed to instruct on aiding and abetting principles. Further, he challenges the trial court's award of victim restitution on the basis that one of the victims did not suffer economic loss. We reject his contentions of reversible error.
The Attorney General concedes, and we agree, that the minute order and abstract of judgment incorrectly refer to a parole revocation restitution fine that was unauthorized and not imposed by the court. Accordingly, we modify the minute order to strike the reference to this fine, and instruct the superior court to prepare an amended abstract of judgment reflecting this change.
As so modified, the judgment is affirmed.[1]

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