Friday, September 27, 2013

CA - People v. Garcia

Diigo Icon
Original Article

Diigo Post Excerpt:
Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant Garcia pleaded no contest to one count of sexual penetration of a person under 18 by a foreign object (Pen. Code, § 289, subd. (h)),[1] one count of oral copulation of a person under 18 (§ 288a, subd. (b)(1)) and one misdemeanor count of dissuading a witness (§ 136.1, subd. (b)(1)). In exchange, Garcia was to receive a top sentence of felony probation with the court to determine at sentencing whether the admitted sexual offenses would remain felonies or be reduced to misdemeanors. The court was also to determine in its discretion under section 290.006 whether or not to require Garcia to register as a sex offender. Garcia was sentenced to three years' felony probation and ordered to register as a sex offender. On appeal, he contends the trial court abused its discretion in requiring him to register as a sex offender and denied him the benefit of his plea agreement by failing to specify whether the offenses to which he pleaded no contest remained felonies or were reduced to misdemeanors. Garcia also filed a separate petition for writ of habeas corpus in which he contends his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to obtain an expert psychological opinion on his propensity to commit forcible sex crimes in the future.

No comments :