P.

P. v. Esparza CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 4, 2013D062190California1,037 words

Opinion

Opinion

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Since this is an appeal following a guilty plea to one count we see no purpose in

setting forth the facts from the preliminary hearing transcript. The factual basis for the

plea was expressed in the following exchange:

"THE COURT: It states here by way of a factual basis of your plea that you unlawfully took the property of NASSCO without permission, and it was in excess of $950; is that what you did in this case, sir?

"THE DEFENDANT: Yes."

DISCUSSION

Sentencing courts have broad discretion in imposing conditions of probation

meant to protect the public and rehabilitate the defendant. (People v. Carbajal (1995)

Cal.4th 1114, 1120.) A defendant may refuse probation if he believes the conditions are

too harsh. (In re Bushman (1970) 1 Cal.3d 767, 776, overruled on another ground in

People v. Lent (1975) 15 Cal.3d 481, 486, fn. 1.) Accepting probation, however, does not

prevent a defendant from then challenging conditions of that probation on appeal. (In re

Bushman, supra, at p. 776.)

We review probation conditions for abuse of discretion. (People v. Carbajal,

supra, 10 Cal.4th at p. 1121.) A probation condition is invalid if it " ' "(1) has…

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.