Hawthorne

People v. Hawthorne

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 4·226 Cal. App. 3d 789·277 Cal. Rptr. 85·91 Daily Journal DAR 243·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 200
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 2, 1991No. A049051California2,155 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Poché, J.

*791 Opinion

Upon revoking probation, is a trial court required to give a statement of reasons when it decides to impose a state prison sentence where no sentence has previously been imposed? The answer is yes. (People v. Jones (1990) 224 Cal.App.3d 1309, 1312-1315 [ 274 Cal.Rptr. 527 ]; People v. Pennington (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 173, 176-177 [ 261 Cal.Rptr. 476 ]; People v. Jackson (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 380, 387 [ 242 Cal.Rptr. 1 ]; contra dictum, People v. Slaughter (1987) 194 Cal.App.3d 95, 98-99 [ 239 Cal.Rptr. 337 ] [but see cone, and dis. opn.].)

A.

Defendant Edward Hawthorne pleaded guilty to one count of selling cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352), and was placed on probation for three years. Six months later, and following his arrest for trespassing and possession of cocaine, the prosecutor moved to revoke probation. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court ordered defendant’s probation revoked, and sentenced defendant to state prison for the middle term of four years.

*792 B.

Defendant contends that the trial court erred in failing to give a statement of reasons when it decided to sentence him to state prison. We agree.

When the trial court decided to revoke…

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.