California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Atkins, A147216 (Cal. App. 2017):
Defendant contends he is entitled to a reversal and remand for resentencing because the trial court abused its discretion in denying his request for reinstatement to probation in case number CR937618 and probation in case number CR940634. However, we conclude defendant is not entitled to any relief as he has failed to demonstrate either prejudicial error or an abuse of discretion such that it is reasonably probable that a more favorable sentence would be imposed if we reversed and remanded for resentence. (People v. Osband (1996) 13 Cal.4th 622, 728.)
Assuming without deciding that defendant preserved for appellate review the objections he now raises, " '[t]he grant or denial of probation is within the trial court's discretion and the defendant bears a heavy burden when attempting to show an abuse of that discretion.' " (People v. Weaver (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 1301, 1311 (Weaver), disapproved on other grounds in People v. Cook (2015) 60 Cal.4th 922, 939.) " 'Our function is to determine whether the trial court's order [denying] . . . probation is arbitrary or capricious or exceeds the bounds of reason considering all the facts and
Page 6
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.