Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

In Re Nesper

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 31, 1990No. A046200PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PERLEY, J.

Petitioner claims that he was discharged from parole by operation of law pursuant to Penal Code 1 section 3001, subdivision (a), when the Board of Prison Terms (BPT) failed to act to retain him on parole. During the relevant time period, section 3001, subdivision (a), provided: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, when any person referred to in subdivision (a) of Section 3000 has been released on parole from the state prison, and has been on parole continuously for one year since release from confinement, the board shall, within 30 days, discharge such person from…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. RamirezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  2. In Re WelchCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987
  3. People v. LaraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
  4. People v. ColverCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. In Re NunezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  2. In Re CarrCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
  3. In Re RoaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
  4. In Re RuzickaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
  5. People v. JackCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API