Castel

People v. Castel

Bad Law
12 Cal. App. 5th 1321·2017 Cal. App. LEXIS 581·219 Cal. Rptr. 3d 829·2017 WL 2729835
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 26, 2017B271396California3,325 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hoffstadt, J.

*1323 When a supervising agency files a petition to modify, revoke, or terminate a criminal defendant's parole or postrelease community supervision, its petition must be accompanied by a written report containing information specified by statute and the California Rules of Court. (Pen. Code, §§ 1203.2, subd. (b)(1) & 3000.08, subd. (f) ; 1 Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.541.) When a district attorney files such a petition, its petition need not be accompanied by such a report. (§ 1203.2, subd. (b)(1) ; cf. § 3000.08, subd. (f).) Does this procedural difference violate equal protection by treating similarly situated defendants differently without a rational basis for doing so? We conclude there is no equal protection violation, and affirm the revocation of parole in this case.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Ignacio Castel (defendant) pled no contest to one count of felony assault (§ 459), and he was sentenced to three years in state prison. Following his release from state prison, he was placed on parole.

In 2015, while on parole, defendant threatened to kill two of his in-laws. The People charged him with a misdemeanor violation of making criminal *1324 threats (§ 422). He pled…

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.