P. v. Walton
Defendant Shane Walton appeals from an order revoking probation and committing him to state prison. He contends that that trial court erred when it found that the allegation that he possessed a concealed dirk or dagger in violation of Penal Code section 12020, subdivision (a)(4)[1] was true. We agree and remand for resentencing in light of the courts other true findings at the probation revocation hearing. In view of our conclusion, Court do not reach defendants contention that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object when the court failed to state its reasons for imposing a prison sentence rather than reinstating probation.
Comments on P. v. Walton