P. v. Colver
After a jury trial, appellant was convicted of violations of both Penal Code sections 273a, subdivision (a) and 273d[1] in connection with burns incurred by his then 17-month-old son. He appeals, claiming that the two crimes of which he was convicted were “mutually exclusive†and that, therefore, one of those convictions should be set aside. He also claims that the probation revocation fee imposed on him should be set aside because the trial court did not properly assess his ability to pay the same. We reject both arguments and affirm both the conviction and the sentence, including the probation fee imposed.
Comments on P. v. Colver