People v. Zamudio
C.A. 2nd; B271406 The Second Appellate District affirmed a trial court order. The court held that a district attorney’s parole revocation petition…
May 31, 2017 at 05:52 PM
2 minute read
C.A. 2nd;
B271406
The Second Appellate District affirmed a trial court order. The court held that a district attorney's parole revocation petition did not need to address the suitability of intermediate sanctions..
In 2013, Raymond Zamudio was convicted of making a criminal threat and sentenced to a two-year prison term. In 2014, he was released on parole. In 2016 he assaulted the mother of his children. The district attorney's office petitioned to revoke Zamudio's parole pursuant to Penal Code §1203.2 and requested issuance of an arrest warrant. The petition for revocation did not include the documentation required under §3000.08 and rule 4.541 of the Cal. Rules of Ct. for a petition filed by the parolee's supervising parole agency, which documentation would include a report on the suitability of imposing intermediate sanctions prior to seeking parole revocation. The trial court found probable cause to support revocation, preliminarily revoked parole pending a full hearing and issued an arrest warrant. Zamudio was remanded into custody.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
The Unraveling of Sean Combs: How Legislation from the #MeToo Movement Brought Diddy Down
Judge Rules Sean Combs Accuser Cannot Sue Anonymously, as Defense Seeks Names
Trending Stories
- 1Jury Says $118M: Netlist Wins Another Patent Verdict Against Samsung
- 2Big Law Media Law Attorneys Brace For Changes Under Trump and Carr’s FCC
- 3Will England Accept that Digital Assets Are ‘Property’?
- 4Congress and Courts Are Considering Litigation Financing: Is Disclosure Imminent?
- 5Bar Report — Nov. 25, 2024
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
