legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Holmes
Defendant Jarret Wade Holmes was convicted of various offenses, including vehicle theft and methamphetamine possession, pursuant to plea bargains in five cases. The first three cases were based on crimes committed before January 1, 2012, and the last two cases were based on crimes committed after January 1, 2012. When the trial court sentenced defendant on the five cases, it imposed a five-year aggregate prison sentence, plus five $240 restitution fines pursuant to Penal Code section 1202.4.[1] The court stated only the following regarding the restitution fines: “He’s to pay a restitution fine in the sum of $1,200. He’s to pay a fine in the sum of $1,200, that’s $240 per case pursuant to Penal Code section 1202.4.”
On appeal, defendant contends the trial court applied the law retroactively because it relied on the amended version of section 1202.4, effective on January 1, 2012, to impose the $240 fine in the first three, pre-2012 cases. He asserts this alleged reliance on the amended statute was a violation of the prohibition against ex post facto laws.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale