Murillo

People v. Murillo

Good Law
102 Cal. App. 4th 1414·126 Cal. Rptr. 2d 358
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 22, 2002E030638California2,771 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hollenhorst, J.

Defendant, Patricia Ann Murillo, appeals from an order revoking probation and sentencing her to 16 months in state prison. She contends the trial court erred in its determination that she was ineligible for probation pursuant to Proposition 36. We agree. Accordingly, we reverse.

Procedural History and Facts

On August 16, 1999, defendant pled guilty to charges of felony possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a) [felony possession of a controlled substance]) in response to a felony complaint (FWV18439) filed by the People on August 2, 1999. On September 13, 1999, defendant was sentenced to 36 months of supervised probation on various terms and conditions, 130 days in jail (with 47 days’ credit for time served), and was ordered to pay a restitution fine of $220.

On July 5, 2000, a petition for revocation of probation was filed, alleging that defendant had violated the terms of her probation by failing to inform her probation officer of a change of residence. On September 28, 2000, defendant was found to be in violation of probation. The trial court reinstated probation on the original terms, modifying the amount of restitution to be paid.

On…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.