People v. Cervantes
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
THE COURT. *
Upon a plea of nolo contendere appellant was convicted of being an accessory after the fact (Pen. Code, § 32). The sentencing court suspended imposition of sentence, placed appellant on formal probation for two years, and as a condition of probation ordered appellant to pay restitution in an amount and manner to be determined by the probation officer.
On appeal from the order granting probation, appellant contends that the condition that appellant pay restitution was improperly imposed because it constituted an unauthorized delegation to the probation officer of the court’s…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- People v. LentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- People v. ArbuckleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- In Re BushmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
- People v. RichardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- People v. LippnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- People v. BaumannCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
- People v. GoulartCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
- Simon v. City and County of San FranciscoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2025
- People v. GarciaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
- People v. VournazosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.