Legal Opinion
In Re Roa
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 5, 1991No. B052861PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
GILBERT, J.
The People appeal from the order granting respondent Peter Coll Roa’s petition for writ of habeas corpus after the trial court found that extension of respondent’s parole was unlawful.
The People contend, among other things, that the superior court misconstrued Penal Code section 3001, subdivision (a). Roa was not automatically discharged from parole because of the failure to provide written notice within the same 30-day period in which the Board of Prison Terms must act to retain him on parole. We agree and reverse.
On February 20, 1989, Roa was paroled from prison after…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- In Re La CroixCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- In Re BowersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
- In Re NesperCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
- In Re RuzickaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
3Cited by5 opinions
- People v. TrujequeCalifornia Supreme Court · 2015
- In Re CarrCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- People v. JackCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
- In Re TorresCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- In re StoneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011