California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Manners, 180 Cal.App.3d 826, 225 Cal.Rptr. 798 (Cal. App. 1986):
Defendant further argues she qualified for probation under these criteria. Citing People v. Langevin (1984) 155 Cal.App.3d 520, 202 Cal.Rptr. 234, she concludes her case should be remanded for resentencing because the record must reflect the court is aware it has the discretion to grant probation. The Attorney General responds that because defendant occupied a position of special trust and was convicted of section 288, subdivision (a), the court properly denied probation.
Neither the transcript of the sentencing hearing nor the report of the probation officer reflect the court's awareness that it had discretion to grant probation under section 1203.066, subdivision (c). In People v. Langevin, supra, 155 Cal.App.3d at page 524, 202 Cal.Rptr. 234, the court wrote:
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.