legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Brinkley
Defendant plead guilty to one count of lewd acts upon a child under the age of 14, in exchange for the dismissal of the more serious remaining count. Defendant was placed on three years of formal probation on various terms and conditions, including serving 365 days in county jail. The same year Legislature enacted section 1465.8, which provided that a $20 court security fee shall be assessed against all convictions. Defendant's probation was revoked based on defendant's failure to inform his probation officer of his arrest in Los Angeles County for rape. Following defendant's admission to the probation violation, the trial court reinstated defendant's probation with the condition that he serve an additional 90 days in local custody. Defendant's probation was again revoked based upon defendant's failure to complete his 90 days in custody and upon his arrest in Los Angeles County for assault with a deadly weapon. Following a probation violation hearing the trial court found that defendant had violated the "violate no law" term of his probation. The court then revoked defendant's probation, sentenced him to six years in prison, and imposed the $20 court security fee pursuant to section 1465.8. Defendant's sole contention on appeal is that the section 1465.8 court security fee must be stricken because it violates retroactivity principles. Court rejected this contention and affirmed 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