 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
People v. Hillery3/18/2003
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
In February 1999, defendant Ronnie Ray Hillery went to the California Highway Patrol office in Stockton to file a complaint. The officer on duty gave defendant a form that contained the following admonition: "It is against the law to make a complaint that you know to be false. If you make a complaint against an officer knowing that it is false, you can be prosecuted on a misdemeanor charge." Defendant returned the completed form by mail. He alleged, among other things, that law enforcement officers used excessive force when they arrested him for driving under the influence of alcohol, and denied him access to medical care.
A jury found defendant's allegations to be false, and convicted him of perjury (Pen. Code, § 118 -- count one), a felony, and making a false allegation of police misconduct (§ 148.6 -- count two), a misdemeanor. The court suspended imposition of sentence, and placed defendant on formal probation for five years on count one and three years on count two. It ordered defendant to serve 120 days in county jail on count two.
The sole issue on appeal is whether defendant is entitled to reversal of his conviction in count two on grounds section 148.6 is unconstitutional on its face. We affirm the judgment based on the California Supreme Court's recent decision in People v. Stanistreet (2002) 29 Cal.4th 497 (Stanistreet). The Stanistreet court rejected the specific contentions raised by defendant in the case before us. It expressly held that section 148.6 falls within at least two categories of content discrimination deemed permissible under R.A.V. v. St. Paul (1992) 505 U.S. 377 [120 L.Ed.2d 305]. (Stanistreet, supra, at p. 508.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur:
NICHOLSON ,Acting P.J.
HULL,J.
Page 1 California DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|