legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Huber CA4/2
A year and a half after the filing deadline for Proposition 36 petitions had passed, defendant and appellant Chad Isaac Huber filed a petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1170.126, known as the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012 (Proposition 36, as approved by voters, Gen. Elec. (Nov. 6, 2012)). The trial court denied defendant’s petition as untimely. On appeal, defendant argues the trial court erred in denying his petition as untimely because he had shown good cause for the delay in filing his resentencing petition under Proposition 36. We agree with the trial court that in this case there was no good cause to justify the untimely filing of the petition, and therefore affirm 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