legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Davidson
Before the operative date of the Criminal Justice Realignment Act (Stats. 2011, 1st Ex.Sess. 2011-2012, ch. 12, § 1; Pen.Code, § 1170, subd. (h))[1] (hereafter the “Act” or “the Realignment Act”), defendant Casey Davidson pleaded no contest to the crime of possession of methamphetamine for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378), and the trial court placed him on probation with a suspended five-year prison sentence. After the operative date of the Realignment Act, defendant admitted a violation of probation, the trial court executed the five-year sentence, and the trial court ordered defendant to serve the sentence in prison. Defendant appeals the order committing him to prison. Defendant contends that, because his sentence was executed after the operative date of the Realignment Act, the trial court was required to commit him to county jail for service of his sentence. For the reasons set forth below, we will reverse the order committing defendant to prison.

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