People v. Dominguez

California Court of Appeal Oct 31, 1973 No. Crim. 23205Published

Before: Hanson

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the defendant was not denied due process because he received adequate actual notice of the probation revocation hearing and the criminal prosecution for the underlying felony satisfied constitutional requirements.

Issues

Whether the defendant was denied due process regarding notice for a probation revocation hearing.
Whether a defendant may relitigate a felony conviction that serves as the basis for a probation revocation.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Defendant was not denied due process and had adequate actual notice.”

“The defendant cannot relitigate the conviction of the felony in case No. A-287241 which was the basis for the revocation of probation in case No. A-268705.”

“The prosecution of the felony in case No. A-287241 satisfied the due process requirements of the Morrissey and Vickers cases in a hearing.”

Opinion

HANSON, J.

Defendant appeals from a revocation of probation order of February 2, 1973, in case No. A-268705.

Contention

Defendant contends that a due process requirement of timely and notice for a hearing on revocation of probation was not met.

Background

The chronology of the pertinent cases and hearings is as follows:

On February 25, 1971, defendant was charged in case No. A-268705 with three counts of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211). Defendant pleaded not

[20]

guilty, waived jury, and by stipulation submitted the case to the trial court on the preliminary hearing transcript. The court found defendant guilty on count three. On April 24, 1972, the defendant was sentenced to state prison for the term prescribed by law, suspended, and placed on probation for five years upon the condition that he spend the first year in the county jail (credit given for one year already served), and other conditions, one of them being that he obey all laws, orders, rules and regulations of the probation department.

On September 7, 1972, while on formal probation in case No. A-268705, the defendant was charged in case No. A-287241 with of the Dangerous Weapons Control Law (Pen. Code, § 12020).

On December 20, 1972, defendant was found guilty, by jury, of this charge (possession of a billy club).

On January 10, 1973, the trial court suspended proceedings at the probation and sentencing hearing and placed defendant on probation for three years.

Defendant-appellant was further charged with a violation of section 459 of the Penal Code (burglary). That charge was dismissed at the revocation hearing of February 2, 1973.

The case at bench pertains to the violation of probation hearing in case No. A-268705 (robbery) held on February 2, 1973, before the same trial judge who presided over the jury trial in which defendant was convicted in case No. A-287241 (violation of Dangerous Weapons Control Law). The court revoked probation in case No. A-268705 and sentenced to state prison for the term prescribed by law.

People v. Dominguez

AI Brief

HANSON, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief