P. v. Hurtado
On June 8, 2011, a jury found defendant and appellant Allix Anastassia Hurtado guilty of burglary under Penal Code[1] section 459 (count 1), and fraudulent use of an access card under section 484g, subdivision (a) (count 2), with a true finding that the value of the property taken was more than $400.
At the sentencing hearing on August 5, 2011, the trial court reduced defendant’s felony conviction in count 2 to a misdemeanor because the threshold amount required for a felony charge, due to a change in the law, had increased from $400 to $950. The court sentenced defendant to state prison for two years on the burglary conviction, but ordered execution of the sentence suspended and placed defendant on probation for 36 months. One of the probation conditions required that defendant inform the probation officer of her place of residence and reside at a residence approved by the probation officer.
On appeal, defendant contends that the probation condition requiring her to reside at a residence “approved†by the probation officer is unconstitutional. We agree and modify this probation condition. In all other respects, we affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Hurtado