Fear Not Law Articles: P. v. Lewis

P. v. Lewis

Filed 6/25/08 P. v. Lewis CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

VIRGIL BUD LEWIS,

Defendant and Appellant.

F054057

(Super. Ct. No. F04907704-1)

OPINION

THE COURT^*

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Arlan L. Harrell, Judge.

Larry L. Dixon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, and John G. McLean, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

-ooOoo-

In 2004, defendant Virgil Bud Lewis was convicted of spousal abuse and placed on three years probation. In 2007, he pled no contest to a charge of child abuse, but later attempted to withdraw his plea. The trial court found defendant in violation of probation. On appeal, he contends that the trial court should not have found him in violation of probation because he should have been allowed to withdraw his plea.

As defendant himself concedes, his entire argument in this case hinges on the success of his argument in his related case, F053683, in which he maintained that he should have been allowed to withdraw his plea. Because we found in that case that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendants motion to withdraw his plea, we subsequently conclude in this case that the trial courts finding that defendant violated probation was proper.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

Publication Courtesy of California free legal resources.

Analysis and review provided by Spring Valley Property line attorney.

San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com

^* Before Cornell, Acting P.J., Gomes, J. and Kane, J.

Description	In 2004, defendant Virgil Bud Lewis was convicted of spousal abuse and placed on three years probation. In 2007, he pled no contest to a charge of child abuse, but later attempted to withdraw his plea. The trial court found defendant in violation of probation. On appeal, he contends that the trial court should not have found him in violation of probation because he should have been allowed to withdraw his plea. As defendant himself concedes, his entire argument in this case hinges on the success of his argument in his related case, F053683, in which he maintained that he should have been allowed to withdraw his plea. Because we found in that case that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendants motion to withdraw his plea, we subsequently conclude in this case that the trial courts finding that defendant violated probation was proper.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.