P. v. Espinoza
Orlando Espinoza appeals from an order modifying his probation pursuant to amended Penal Code section 1203.067,[1] which sets forth various new probation conditions for registered sex offenders. As we recently concluded in People v. Douglas M. (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 1068 (Douglas M.)—a case nearly identical to the present one—because the presumption of prospectivity of Penal Code statutes, mandated by section 3, cannot be rebutted, the provisions of revised section 1203.067 may not be applied retroactively to probationers like appellant, who committed their offenses before the effective date of the amendment. Accordingly, the new terms and conditions of appellant’s probation containing these provisions must be stricken.
Comments on P. v. Espinoza