Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Lucero

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided May 9, 1989No. 1 CA-CR 88-768Published

1DissentEubank, Judge

I dissent. A sentence to a term of incarceration for four years cannot be imposed consecutively to a prior one year jail term, which was imposed as a condition of probation and was unrevoked at the time of sentencing. The simple reason for this is that probation jail time is not a “sentence” but is a condition of probation. It is a suspended sentence.

In State v. Barksdale, 143 Ariz. 465, 468, 694 P.2d 295, 298 (App.1984) we said:

We agree with the appellee and the trial court, however, that a suspended sentence resulting in probation does not constitute a “sentence” as that term is used in the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Pickett v. BoykinArizona Supreme Court · 1978
  2. State v. RisherArizona Supreme Court · 1978
  3. State v. MooreCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1986
  4. State v. BarksdaleCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1984
  5. State v. CarranzaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1988

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

Powered by the Exa API