California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Oloba-Aisony, B268069 (Cal. App. 2016):
Appellant did the right thing and still got punished." However, appellant admitted he never consulted with his parole agent for an exception to the restriction to allow him to work at the beach during late-night hours when children would not be present. Moreover, the argument ignores the function of parole conditions as the agreement a parolee makes in exchange for the benefit of release from prison before completion of the sentence. (Morrissey v. Brewer (1972) 408 U.S. 471, 477 ["essence of parole is release from prison, before the completion of sentence, on the condition that the prisoner abide by certain rules during the balance of the sentence"].) After accepting the benefit of parole, appellant seeks to modify the conditions of that parole to suit his alleged work schedule without properly notifying his parole officer. But having taken the benefit of parole, appellant must abide by its conditions. Based on appellant's multiple violations of his parole condition not to enter an area where children congregate, the trial court properly exercised its broad discretion in revoking his parole.
Page 8
The judgment is affirmed.
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.