People v. Martin CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 26, 2016G051610California1,736 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fybel, J.

INTRODUCTION

Defendant Olin Johnston Martin, Jr., was convicted of forcible oral copulation, assault, and possession of cocaine, and sentenced to a term of 35 years to life. Martin challenges the trial court’s postjudgment order denying Martin’s motion to strike the prosecution’s Penal Code section 1203.01 statement that was filed over two months after Martin was sentenced. (All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified.) Section 1203.01 establishes a procedure for the prosecution to convey information to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation; such information might be relevant to future punishment decisions, including parole. (In re Minnis (1972) 7 Cal.3d 639, 650.) We affirm. The trial court had jurisdiction to accept the prosecution’s section 1203.01 statement for filing, and the statement was not otherwise untimely filed.

BACKGROUND

Martin was charged in an information with forcible oral copulation (§ 288a, subd. (c)(2) [count 1]), sexual penetration by a foreign object and force (§ 289, subd. (a)(1)(A) [count 2]), and possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a) [count 3]). A jury…

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.