California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Coker, F077092 (Cal. App. 2020):
We agree with the parties that appellant's prior prison enhancements ( 667.5, subd. (b)) must be stricken. However, we reject appellant's remaining claims. He did not suffer prejudice when the trial court prohibited a witness from testifying about the victim's "character for truthfulness." Further, remand is not required for the court to exercise its sentencing discretion for the prior serious felony enhancement ( 667, subd. (a)(1)). Finally, appellant's constitutional rights were not violated when the court imposed the restitution fine and various assessments without conducting an ability to pay hearing. (See People v. Dueas (2019) 30 Cal.App.5th 1157 (Dueas). We strike the prior prison term enhancements but otherwise affirm.
Page 3
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.