Hilton v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KITCHING, J.
INTRODUCTION
In this case, we hold a trial court does not have jurisdiction to modify a defendant’s probation to impose restitution after the defendant’s probationary term has expired. Such a modification would be erroneous as an act in excess of the trial court’s jurisdiction. Moreover, to hold otherwise would subject a defendant placed on probation to a lifetime restitution obligation and there would be no end to the restitution orders trial courts could impose on such a defendant.
Our holding is based largely on In re Griffin (1967) 67 Cal.2d 343 [62 Cal.Rptr. 1, 431 P.2d…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- People v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- People v. HarrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
- People v. Superior Court (Zamudio)California Supreme Court · 2000
- People v. GiordanoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
- People v. TannerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- People v. WatersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- In re Jesse Barber On Habeas Corpus, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- In re A.R.California Court of Appeal · 2022
- In re Jesse BarberCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- Kuhnel v. Super. Ct.California Court of Appeal · 2022
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.