Legal Opinion

State v. Candedo

Utah Supreme Court

Decided May 14, 2010No. 20080183PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PARRISH, Justice:

INTRODUCTION

¶ 1 Francisco Candedo was placed on nine years of probation after pleading guilty to three felonies arising from his participation in a fraudulent investment scheme. Candedo did not object to the term of probation at sentencing. Instead, on direct appeal to the court of appeals, he challenged the legality of his probation sentence under rule 22(e) of the Utah Rules of Criminal Procedure or, alternatively, under the doctrine of exceptional circumstances. Candedo argued that his nine-year probation sentence, authorized under Utah Code section 77-18-l(10)(a)(i),…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Kansas v. HendricksSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  2. Chapman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Jau-Fei Chen v. StewartUtah Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Condemarin v. University HospitalUtah Supreme Court · 1989
  5. United States v. AngelosCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2006

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. State v. MaestasUtah Supreme Court · 2012
  2. State v. HoustonUtah Supreme Court · 2015
  3. State v. AngilauUtah Supreme Court · 2011
  4. State v. KozlovCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2012
  5. State v. Hon. BoydenUtah Supreme Court · 2019

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

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

Powered by the Exa API