P. v. Fagan CA5
Defendant Harold Hendricks Fagan contends on appeal that (1) the trial court abused its discretion in finding defendant would pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety if resentenced under Proposition 36, the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012 (Proposition 36), and (2) the definition of dangerousness in Proposition 47, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act (Proposition 47), applies to Proposition 36 petitions. We affirm.
Comments on P. v. Fagan CA5